Skip to main content

Full text of "The Royal Academy from Reynolds to Millais"

See other formats 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY 

FROM  REYNOLDS  TO  MILLAIS 

Edited  by  Charles  Holme 


OFFICES  OF  ,THE  STVDIO',  LONDON 
PARIS,  AND  NEW  YORK  MCMIV 


PREFATORY  NOTE 


In  the  following  pages  an  effort  has  been  made  to  gather  together 
a  number  of  illustrations,  including  portraits,  autograph  letters  and 
other  documents,  that  may  be  of  service  to  readers  desirous  of 
obtaining  a  general  idea  of  the  progress  of  the  Royal  Academy 
during  a  period  that  is  regarded  by  many  as  the  most  vitally 
interesting  of  its  existence.  Such  w^orks  as  have  hitherto  appeared 
upon  the  subject  have  been  either  inadequately  illustrated  or  confined 
solely  to  letterpress.  The  subject  is  a  vast  one — too  vast  to  permit 
of  exhaustive  treatment  in  a  single  volume,  and  no  such  attempt  is 
made  here. 

In  the  preparation  of  this  work  the  Editor  desires  to  acknowledge 
his  indebtedness  to  those  who  have  rendered  him  assistance  by  the 
loan  of  pictures,  prints,  photographs,  etc.,  and  by  according  him 
permission  to  reproduce  them  in  this  publication.  In  particular 
he  tenders  his  best  thanks  to  Messrs.  Ernest  Brown  and  Phillips, 
Sir  Edward  Durning-Lawrence,  Bart.,  M.P.,  Mr.  James  Orrock, 
R.I.,  and  Mr.  C.  M.  W.  Turner,  who  have  entrusted  him  with 
original  works  ;  to  Messrs.  P.  and  D.  Colnaghi,  Mr.  F.  B.  Daniell, 
Messrs.  Maggs  Brothers,  Mr.  F.  Pollard,  and  Messrs.  J.  Rimell  and 
Sons,  the  owners  of  many  of  the  engravings  reproduced  ;  and  to  the 
Autotype  Company  of  New  Oxford  Street,  for  a  series  of  photo- 
graphs placed  at  his  service. 


ARTICLES 


"The  Royal  Academy  :  Its  Origin  and  History."    Written  by  W.  K.  West. 

Pages  R  i  to  R  xvi 

"  Painters  of  the  Royal  Academy,  1 768-1 868."    Written  by  W.  S.  Sparrow. 

Pages  P  i  to  P  xvi 

"The  Sculptors  of  the  Royal  Academy,  1 768-1 868."    Written  by  W.  S.  Sparrow. 

Pages  s  i  to  s  viii 

"Engravers  of  the  Royal  Academy,  1768-1868."    Written  by  W.  S.  Sparrow. 

Pages  E  i  to  E  viii 

"The  Architects  of  the  Royal  Academy,  1768-1868."    Written  by  W.  S.  Sparrow. 

Pages  A  i  to  A  viii 

"  Notes  on  Portraits  of  some  Leading  Academicians."    Written  by  T.  Martin  Wood. 

Pages  I, A  i  to  LA  iv 


FACSIMILE  LETTERS 


P.  Sandby,  R.  Cosway,  J.  F.  Rigaud,  W.  Beechey,  and  H. 

Tresham,  to  the  President  of  the  Royal  Academy  To  face  page 

J.  S.  Copley,  James  Wyatt,  John  Yenn,  F.  Bourgeois,  to 

the  President  of  the  Royal  Academy 
P.  Sandby,  R.A.  ^ 
Sir  Thomas  Lawrence,  P.R.A. 
P.  J.  de  Loutherbourg,  R.A. 
Henry  Fuseli,  R.A. 
William  Etty,  R.A. 
J.  M.  W.  Turner,  R.A. 
Sir  A.  W.  Callcott,  R.A. 
James  Ward,  R.A. 
Sir  M.  A.  Shee,  P.R.A. 
Sir  C.  L.  Eastlake,  P.R.A.  "  ^  ""'^ 

John  Flaxman,  R.A.  "  ^  ^ 

Sir  Francis  Chantrey,  R.A. 
Sir  Charles  Barry,  R  .A. 


5,  R  V 

n  R  vi 

„  R  ix 

3)  R  X 

5,  R  xii 

»  R  XV 

„  P  vii 

„  P  ix 

«  p  X 


S  IV 

s  vi 
A  iv 


b 


GENERAL  INDEX  OF  ILLUSTRA- 


TIONS 

Bacon,  J., 
Bailey,  E.  H., 
Banks,  T., 
Barry,  Sir  Charles 
Bartolozzi,  F.,    e  i,  e 
Beechey,  Sir  W., 
Bromley,  W., 
Browne,  J., 

Callcott,  Sir  A.  W., 
Chalon,  J.  J., 
Chambers,  T., 
Chantrey,  Sir  F.  L., 
Cipriani,  J.  B., 
Collyer,  J., 
Constable,  J., 
Copley,  J.  S., 
Cosway,  R., 
Cotes,  F., 
Cousins,  S., 
Creswick,  T., 

Dance,  G., 
Daniell,  W., 
Dawe,  G., 

De  Loutherbourg,  P.  J., 
Doo,  G.  T., 

Eastlake,  Sir  C.  L., 
Edridge,  H., 
Elmore,  A.  E., 
Etty,  W., 

FiTTLER,  J., 

Flaxman,  J., 
Foley,  J.  H, 

Gainsborough,  T., 
Gibson,  J., 
Gilpin,  S., 
Graves,  R., 
Green,  V., 

Hamilton,  W. 
Haward,  F., 
Heath,  J., 
Hoppner,  J., 

Kauffman,  a., 

Landseer,  Sir  E.  H., 
Landseer,  J., 


S3 

s  13,  s  16 
s  4 

s  P 

2,  e  3,  e  4,  and  s  p 
E  21,  and  s  p 
e  21 
E  6 

p  25  s  p 
p  50 

s  7 

s  II,  s  12 
s  P 
E  14 

p  43,  p  44  s  p 
p  12 
p  II 

p  2 

E  31,  E  32 
P  52 

S  P 
P  41 

P  39 
p  13 

E  33j  e  34 

P45 
p  40 

P  53 

8  P 
E  17 

p  27,  p  28,  s  5,  s  6 
s  19 

p  9,  and  s  p 
s  14 
p  24 

E  23,  E  24 
E  9,  E  10,  E  II 

S  P 

E  12,  E  13 
E  15 
P  22,  P  23 

S  P 

p  46,  P  47,  and  s  P 
E  18 


Lane,  R.  J.,  e  22 

Lawrence,  Sir  T.,  p  19,  and  s  p 

Leslie,  C.  R.,  p  42 

McDowell,  P., 
Major,  T., 
Marshall,  W.  C, 
Millais,  Sir  J.  E., 
Mortimer,  J.  H., 
Moser,  M., 
Mulready,  W., 


s  15 
E  8 
s  18 

P  55,  P  56,  P  57 
P  15 
P7 
s  p 


Nollekens,  J., 

Opie,  J., 

Phillip,  J., 

Raeburn,  Sir  H., 
Ravenet,  S.  F., 
Reynolds,  Sir  J., 
Rigaud,  J.  F., 
Roberts,  D., 
Robinson,  J.  H., 
Rooker,  M.  A., 
Rossi,  j.  C.  F., 
Russell,  J. 

Sandby,  P. 
Shee,  Sir  M.  A., 
Smirke,  R., 
Smith,  A., 
Stanfield,  W.  C, 
Stothard,  T., 

Theed,  W., 

Turner,  C,  e  25,  e 

Turner,  J.  M.  W.,  p  29,  p  30, 

P  33,  P 


p  I 


s  2 
s  p 

P  54 

P38 

E  5 
^  and  s  p 
p  17 

P  49 
E  29,  E  30 
p  8 
s  7 
p  16 

p6 
p  26 
p  18 

E  16 
P  48 
P  20,  P  21 


Ward,  J., 
Ward,  W., 
Webster,  T., 
West,  Sir  B., 
Westmacott,  Sir  R., 
Wilkie,  Sir  D., 
Willmore,  J.  T., 
Wilson,  R., 
Wilton,  J., 
Wright,  J, 
Wyon,  W., 

Zoffany,  J., 


p 

E  19,  E 


s  10 
26,  and  s  p 

P  3i>  P  32, 

34,  and  s  p 

37,  and  s  p 
20,  and  s  p 
p  51 

P  3 
s  8,  s  9 

P  35,  P  36 

E  27,  E  28 

P4,  P5 

s  I 

P  14 
s  17 

p  10,  and  s  p 


PORTRAIT  SECTION 

Banks,  Thomas, 
Bartolozzi,  Francesco, 
Beechey,  Sir  William, 
Bourgeois,  Sir  Francis, 

Carl  INI,  Agostino, 
Chambers,  Sir  William, 
Cipriani,  John  Baptist, 
Cosway,  Richard, 
Cousins,  Samuel, 

Daniell,  William, 
De  Loutherbourg,  P.  J., 

Eastlake,  Sir  Charles, 

Flaxman,  John, 
Fuscli,  Henry, 


A    T  *7 

A  17 

r^wnnTT'?  Andrew. 

a  21 

.  A  4. 
A  15 

HcppNER,  John, 

A  II 

A9 

Jackson,  John, 

A  20 

A  4 

A  5 

Lawrence,  Sir  Thomas, 

A  13 

A  A 

A  4 
A  6 

NoRTHCOTE,  James, 

A  0 

A  23 

Raeburn,  Sir  Henry, 
Reynolds,  Sir  Joshua, 

A  14 

A  18 

A  I 

A  7 

Stan  field,  W.  Clarkson, 

A  22 

A  19 

Turner,  J.  M.  W., 

A  16 

A  12 

A  10 

West,  Benjamin, 

A  2 

LIST  OF  SPECIAL  PLATES 


SPECIAL  PLATES  IN  PHOTOGRAVURE 

"  f  Devonshire,"  from  the  mezzotint  by  Valentine 

Green,  after  Sir  T.  Reynolds  r  • 

The  Vestal  Virgin,"  LA4eIicaKauffina„,R.A.  I 

1  he  Jiather,"  by  W.  Etty,  R.A  '* 
Portrait,  by  John  Opie,  R.A    *  '  R  xiv 

Mrs.  Robinson,  «  Perdita,"  by  Thomas  Gainsborough,  R.A.  " 


J,  R  XVI 

»  P  ii 


SPECIAL  PLATES  IN  COLOUR 

«  Musidora,"  by  Wilham  Hamilton,  R.A.  p  ■ 

On  the  Rhine,"  by  J.  M.  W.  Turner,  R.A.  ^""^  ' 

On  the  Sea  Coast,"  by  Sir  A.  W.  Callcott,  R.A.  "  l  V. 

Donkeys,"  by  James  Ward,  R.A  "  ^ 

The  Wedding-Day,"  by  William  Mulready,  R.A.  "  ^  ^ 

LowLife,"bySirE.  H.  Landseer,  R.A.  "  o 

"Harvesting,"  by  John  Constable,  R.A  ^  p  19 

Portrait  of  Angelica  KaulFman,  R.A.,  after  Sir  T  Reynolds  "  ^ 

Portrait  of  J.  M.  W.  Turner,  R.A.,  by  Char  JTurn'^^^^^^^^  '  " 


LA  n 


SPECIAL  PLATES  IN  HALF-TONE 

Portrait  of  Joseph  Nollekens,  R.A.,  by  Sir  W  Beechev  R  A  ■ 
"  Louisa,"  by  William  Ward,  A.R  /  ^  '     *  -"^^^^ey^  ^- A.  Faang 
The  Royal  Academy  of  Arts,  by  Johann  Zoffany,  R.A. 


E  VI 

»  A  viii 


SPECIAL  PLATE  IN  LITHOGRAPHY 

Victoria  Tower,  Westminster,  by  Sir  Charles  Barry,  R.A. 


Fachig        A  iv 


CHRONOLOGICAL  LIST  OF  AS- 
SOCIATES AND  MEMBERS  OF 
THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY 

{An  asterisk  slgniHes  that  the  artistes  work  is  illustrated  in  this  publication  ;  special 
plates  being  indicated  by  the  letters  S.P.) 


PAINTERS*  SECTION 


ELECTED 
A.R.A.  R.A. 


ISP 


CXD 


(U 

a 


a 

G 
O 


1769 
1769 
1770  1771 

1770  1783 
1770 

1770 
1770 
1770 
1770 

1771  1777 

1771 
1771 
1771 


/  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds* 
Francis  Cotes*  2 
George  Barret 
Charles  Catton 
Jeremiah  Meyer 
Benjamin  West*  3 
Paul  Sandby*  6 
John  Baker 
Samuel  Wale 
Mason  Chamberlin 
John  Richards 
Peter  Toms 
Nathaniel  Hone 
Francesco  Zuccarelli 
Dominic  Serres 
G.  Baptista  Cipriani*      s  p 
Richard  Wilson*  4,  5 

Edward  Penny 
Francis  Milner  Newton 
Angelica  KaufFman*       s  p 
Mary  Moser*  7 
Francis  Hayman 
Thomas  Gainsborough* 


Sir  Nathaniel  Dance 
Johann  ZofFany* 
William  Hoarc 
Richard  Cosway* 
Edmund  Garvey 
George  James 
Elias  Martin 
Antonio  Zucchi 
Michael  Angelo  Rooker* 
William  Pars 
Rev.  Mathew  William 

Peters,  res.  1790 
Nicholas  Thomas  Dall 
Biaggio  Rebecca 
William  Tomkins 


9  s  p 


10  s  p 


1 1 


PAINTERS'  SECTION— continuea 


ELECTED 
A.R.A.  R.A. 

1772  1773 
1772  1784 
1772  1788 
1772 
1773 

1776  1779 
1776 
1778 
1778 

1779  I79I 
1779 

1780 

1780  I781 


I781 

1783 
1784 

1785 

1786 

1786 

1786 

1787 

1787 

1787 

1788 

1790 

I79I 

179I 

I79I 

I79I 
1792 
1793 
1793 
1795 
1795 
1796 
1798 


785 
789 
791 
787 
787 
787 

793 
812 
814 
790 
791 

793 
794 
794 

799 
794 
795 
798 

797 
799 
800 


PLATE 
(P) 


17 
16 


12 


15 


James  Barry,  exp.  1779 
John  Francis  Rigaud* 
John  Russell* 
Stephen  Elmer 
Edward  Edwards 
John  Singleton  Copley* 
William  Parry 
John  H.  Mortimer* 
James  Nixon 
Ozias  Humphrey 
Horace  Hone 
George  Stubbs 
Philip  James  de  Louther- 

bourg* 
Joseph  Wright  (of  Derby)* 

Joseph  Farington 
William  Hamilton* 
John  Webber 
John  Opie* 
James  Northcote 
William  Hodges 
Sir  Francis  Bourgeois 
Philip  Reinagle 
William  Radmore  Bigg 
Henry  Fuseli 
Francis  Wheatley 
Robert  Smirke* 
Thomas  Stothard*  20. 
Sir  Thomas  Lawrence* 


13 


s  p 


s  P 


21 


19 


S  P 


Henry  Tresham 
Richard  Westall 
John  Hoppner*         22,  23 
Sir  William  Beechey*     s  p 
John  Downman 
Sawrey  Gilpin*  24 
Thomas  Daniell 
Sir  Martin  Archer  Shee*  26 


PAINTERS'  SECTION— continued 


ELECTED 


A.R.A> 

R.  A. 

1799 

1 002 

1800 

1807 

1 800 

1  000 

1 800 

1  0(J  1 

1  004 

I  oOI 

lol  I 

1003 

1 804. 

I  806 

1  004- 

1 000 

1  ouu 

1 0 1  (J 

1  ooy 

T  8t  T 

1 0  I  1 

1  007 

1 02Z 

T  80*7 

1 000 

I0O9 

loll 

T  ^^^^^^ 
1  ouy 

t8t/« 

I  8  10 

I0I2 

IOI5 

1012 

IOI5 

I  0  I  Z 

1010 

1012 

IOI3 

T  8  T  /-V 

1 0 1 9 

I8I3 

IOI4 

1020 

1014 

1023 

I0I5 

lOIO 

1815 

1817 

I816 

1822 

IOI7 

I  020 

I  0 1 0 

IOI9 

1029 

1 020 

182I 

1826 

182I 

1822 

1824 

1822 

1826 

1824 

1828 

1825 

1825 

1832 

1825 

1835 

1826 

I83I 

1827 

1830 

1827 

I84I 

1828 

1832 

PLATli 
(P) 

Joseph  Mallord  William 
Turner* 


31 


29)  30, 
)  32,  33>  34  s  p 


Samuel  Woodforde 
Henry  Howard 
George  Garrard 
Henry  Thomson 
Henry  Bone 
Theophilus  Clarke 
William  Owen 
Thomas  Phillips 
Sir  Augustus  Wall  Call 

cott* 
James  Ward* 
William  Daniell* 
Archer  James  Oliver 
Samuel  Drummond 
Sir  David  Wilkie* 


25  s  p 
37  s  P 
41 


35, 


36 
39 


George  Dawe* 
George  Arnald 
Edward  Bird 
Sir  Henry  Raeburn*  38 
Alfred  Edward  Chalon 
William  Westall 
William  Hilton 
George  Francis  Joseph 
William  Collins 
Ramsay  Richard  Reinagle 
William  Mulready*        s  p 
John  Jackson 
Richard  Cook 
Abraham  Cooper 
Washington  AUston 
John  Constable*  43,  44  s  p 
Henry  Edridge* 
Charles  Robert  Leslie* 
George  Clint 
George  Jones 
Henry  William 

Pickersgill 
William  Etty* 
Francis  Danby 
Henry  Perronet  Briggs 
Sir  William  Allan 
Sir  Edwin  Henry 

Landseer*        46,  47 
Sir  Charles  Lock 

Eastlake* 
John  James  Chalon* 
Gilbert  Stuart  Newton 


ELECTED 
A.R.A.  R.A. 

1830  1840 


40 
42 


S  P 


S  P 

45 
50 


1832 
1832 

1833 
1834 
1835 
1835 
1836 

1837 

1837 
1838 

1838 

1840 

1840 

1841 

1841 

1842 

1842 

1842 

1843 

1843 
1844 

1845 

1845 

1845 

1846 

1846 

1846 

1847 


835 

838 
838 
840 
840 
844 

845 
841 

843 
846 
851 
846 
851 
851 
851 

848 

848 

853 
856 

855 
861 

857 
860 


1848 
1848 
1850 
1851 
1851 
1851 
1852 

1853  1863 
1855 

1857  1859 

1857 

1859 

i860 

i860 

1861 

1861 

1861 


PLATE 
(P) 

Frederick  William 

Witherington 
Wm.Clarkson  Stanfield*  48 
Andrew  Geddes 
Thomas  Uwins 
Frederic  Richard  Lee 
Daniel  Maclise 
Solomon  Alexander  Hart 
John  Prescott  Knight 
George  Patten 
Charles  Landseer 
David  Roberts*  49 
Sir  William  Charles  Ross 
Thomas  Webster*  51 
Richard  Redgrave 
John  Rogers  Herbert 
Sir  John  Watson  Gordon 
Thomas  Creswick*  52 
Sir  Francis  Grant 
John  Hollins 
Charles  West  Cope 
Thomas  Duncan 
William  Dyce 
William  Powell  Frith 
Alfred  Elmore*  53 
Thomas  Sidney  Cooper 
Edward  Matthew  Ward 
Paul  Falconer  Poole 
William  Edward  Frost 
Frederick  Richard  Pickers- 

gill 

Augustus  Leopold  Egg 

Robert  Thorburn 

James  Clarke  Hook 

William  Boxall 

Frank  Stone 

Edward  William  Cooke 

Frederick  Goodall 

Sir  John  E.  Millais*  55, 

56,  57 
John  Callcott  Horsley 
John  Phillip*  54 
George  Richmond 
John  Frederick  Lewis 
Henry  Nelson  O'Neil 
Wm.  Chas.  Thos.  Dobson 
Richard  Ansdell 
Thomas  Faed 
James  Sant 


ENGRAVERS'  SECTION 


ELECTED 
A.E.R.A. 


PLATE 

(E) 


1770 
1770 
1770 
1770 
1770 
1775 

1783 
1786 
1791 
1797 
1800 
1806 


^  /Francesco  Bartolozzi* 
^1  2,  3,  4 

Thomas  Major* 
Simon  Francis  Ravenet* 
Peter  Charles  Canot 
John  Browne* 
Thomas  Chambers* 
Valentine  Green* 
Francis  Haward* 
Joseph  CoUyer* 
James  Heath* 
Anker  Smith* 
James  Fittler* 
John  Landseer* 


9- 
12, 


s  p 


6 

7 
1 1 

13 
14 
15 
16 

17 
18 


ELECTED 
A.E.R.A.  R.A. 

1814 
1819 
1827 
1828 

1835  1855 

1836 
1843 

1853 
1856 

1856  1857 


PLATE 


William  Ward*  19,  20  s  p 
William  Bromley*  21 
Richard  James  Lane*  22 
Charles  Turner  *25,  26  s  p 
Samuel  Cousins  (New 

Class)*  31 
Robert  Graves*  23. 
James  Tibbetts  Will- 
more*  27 
Lumb  Stocks 
John  Henry  Robinson 

(New  Class)*  29,  30 
George  Thomas  Doo 

(New  Class)*         33,  34 


32 
24 

28 


SCULPTORS'  SECTION 

A.R.A.  R.A. 

'Joseph  Wilton* 


PLATE 

(s) 


■73  ^ 


w  00 


1770 
1770 
I77I 
1784 

I79I 
1797 

1798 

1805 


I77I 

1778 

1772 

1785 

1809 
1800 

1802 

I8II 


George  Michael  Moser 
Richard  Yeo 
Agostino  Carlini 
Edward  Burch 
John  Bacon*  3 
Joseph  Nollekens*  2 
Thomas  Banks*  4 
Nathaniel  Marchant 
John  Flaxman*  5,  6  &  p  27 
p  28 

Charles  Felix  Rossi*  7 
Sir  Richard  Westma- 
cott*  8.  Q 


A.R.A.  R.A.  ^^(s™ 

181 1  1813  William  Theed*  10 

1816  1818  Sir  Francis  Chantrey*  11,12 

1 81 7  1 82 1  Edward  Hodges  Baily* 

I3>  16 

1 83 1  1838  William  Wyon*  17 

1833  1836  John  Gibson*  14 

1838  1849  Richard  Westmacott 

1 84 1  1846  Patrick  McDowell*  15 

1844  1852  William  Calder  Marshall* 1 8 

1849  1858  John  Henry  Foley*  19 

1 85 1  Henry  Weekes 

1 86 1  Baron  Carlo  Marochetti 


ARCHITECTS'  SECTION 

A.R.A.  R.A. 


1770 
1770 

1774 
1789 

1795 
1803 


1785 
I79I 

1802 


Thomas  Sandby 
Sir  William  Chambers 
(  John  Gwynn 
William  Tyler 
George  Dance 
Edward  Steevens 
James  Wyatt 
John  Yenn 
Joseph  Bonomi 
Sir  John  Soane 
Joseph  Gandy 


A.R.A.  R.A. 

1811 
1824 
1826 
1838 


li 

1822 
1823 
1826 

1829 

1839 
1840 

1847 
1855 
1861 


1836 
i8ii 
1842 
1859 
i860 


Sir  Robert  Smirke,  Jun. 
Sir  JefFry  Wyatville 
William  Wilkins 
John  Peter  Dearing 

(formerly  Gandy) 
Charles  Robert  Cockerell 
Philip  Hardwick 
Sir  Charles  Barry 
Sydney  Smirke 
Sir  G.  Gilbert  Scott 
Edward  Middleton 

Barry 


s  p 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY: 
ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

^HERE  are  not  many  art  societies  which  can 
point  to  such  a  career  as  the  Royal  Academy 
has  enjoyed  since  its  creation  nearly  a  century 
and  a  half  ago.  During  this  long  period  its 
prosperity  has  been  continuous  and  progressive  ; 
Its  authority  has  steadily  increased,  and  its 
popularity  has  become  so  surely  established 
....  ^  .  ^^^^  seems  to  be  proof  against  all  possible 
vicissitudes.  It  is  now,  and  has  been  for  very  many  years 
accepted  both  by  the  puHic  and  the  majority  of  art  workers  as 
the  governing  influence  in  the  British  art  world,  and  neither 
criticism  nor  opposition,  of  which  it  has  had  its  fair  share  at  all 
stages  of  Its  development,  can  be  said  to  have  perceptibly  affected 
Its  progress.  A  number  of  causes  have  combined  to  give  it  the 
remarkable  position  which  it  now  holds.  It  has  been  from  the  very 
beginning  under  the  direct  patronage  of  the  Crown,  and  has  acquired 
in  consequence  a  social  standing  of  a  very  definite  kind  It  has 
maintained  a  free  school  for  students  of  art  under  the  direction  of 
the  leading  artists  of  this  country,  and  so  has  played  a  part  of  no 
little  significance  in  artistic  education.  It  has  by  its  annual  exhibi- 
tions provided  the  many  people  who  are  interested  in  or  curious 
about  art  matters  with  a  periodical  entertainment.  In  many  other 
ways,  by  taking  an  active  part  in  schemes  intended  to  promote  the 
credit  of  British  art  at  home  and  abroad,  by  giving  frequent  and 
generous  contributions  of  money  for  the  assistance  of  artists  in 
distress,  by  the  administration  of  funds  entrusted  to  it  for  various 
professional  purposes,  and  by  constant  intervention  in  the  politics  of 
the  art  world,  it  has  year  by  year  strengthened  its  claim  to  considera- 
tion, until  at  last  it  cannot  be  said  to  have  a  rival  or  even  a  serious 
competitor. 

Jt  is  probable  that  the  success  of  the  Academy  is  in  some  measure 
due  to  the  pecuharity  of  its  constitution.  Unhke  most  societies  with 
a  public  mission,  it  has  never  been  hampered  by  hard  and  fast  regu- 
lations, which  might  have  prevented  its  expansion.  Really  it  has 
been  given  every  opportunity,  from  the  outset,  of  managing  its  affairs 
in  Its  own  fashion,  and  it  has  been  responsible  to  no  one  save  the 
Sovereign  personally.  It  may  be  defined,  rather  paradoxically,  as  a 
private  institution  which  holds  a  public  position,  and  which,  though 


R  1 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
it  is  under  the  actual  control  of  the  Crown,  has  not  to  give  an  account 
of  itself  to  Parliament  or  to  any  of  the  State  departments.     At  the 
same  time,  while  it  does  work  which  is  in  many  ways  of  national 
importance,  it  has  no  subsidy  from  the  Government,  and  therefore  is 
not  subject  to  any  inquiry  as  to  its  expenditure  or  as  to  the  conduct 
of  its  concerns.    If  it  were  in  financial  straits  it  would  be  entitled 
by  early  precedents  to  expect  assistance  from  the  Sovereign,  but  it 
could  claim  nothing  from  the  Treasury  in  the  way  of  a  grant  in  aid. 
Whatever  disadvantages  there  may  be  in  a  position  which  requires 
of  the  Academy  such  absolute  dependence  upon  its  own  resources  are 
more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  accompanying  liberty  to  fix  its 
own  policy  and  to  vary  its  arrangements  practically  as  it  chooses. 
This  liberty,  enjoyed  for  nearly  a  century  and  a  half,  has,  it  can 
scarcely  be  doubted,  been  very  helpful  to  an  institution  which  needs 
particularly  to  keep  itself  in  touch  with  popular  demands. 
The  Academy  was  by  no  means  the  first  society  founded  in  this 
country  to  watch  over  the  interests  of  modern  art.    Several  attempts 
had  been  made  during  the  earlier  years  of  the  eighteenth  century  to 
organise  an  efficient  school  of  art  and  to  provide  facihties  for  the 
exhibition  of  pictures  and  sculpture.     Some  of  these  attempts  met 
with  a  fair  measure  of  success,  others  were  immediate  failures  ;  but 
in  them  all  the  incapacity  of  the  artists  associated  to  agree  on  any 
settled  policy  stood  in  the  way  of  real  progress.    They  can  be  taken, 
however,  as  evidences  of  the  feeling  which  was  steadily  growing  up 
that  some  regular  system  of  art  education  was  really  necessary,  and 
that  some  central  organisation,  round  which  the  scattered  forces  of 
English  Art  could  rally,  would  be  generally  helpful.     That  the 
growth  of  this  feeling  should  have  been  so  long  delayed  may  be 
attributed  to  the  fact  that  in  previous  centuries  most  of  the  artists 
of  note  who  practised  in  this  country  had  been  importations  from 
abroad.     There  was  little  encouragement  given  to  men  of  native 
birth,    and   consequently   comparatively  few  of  them  adopted  a 
profession  in  which  the  chief  prizes  were  reserved  for  foreigners. 
Moreover,  even  as  late  as  the  seventeenth  century  the  social  con- 
ditions in  England  were  hardly  such  as  to  foster  any  definite  art 
taste — they  were  very  unlike  those  which,  at  the  same  period^ 
encouraged  in  such  a  marked  manner  the  activity  of  the  French 
School. 

Yet  it  is  clear  that  the  question  of  art  education  was  at  this  time 
beginning  to  occupy  the  minds  of  some  Englishmen  of  intelligence. 
For  instance,  there  is  in  John  Evelyn's  "  Sculptura,"  which  was 
published  in  1662,  a  suggested  scheme  for  an  Academy,  which  is. 
R  ii 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

S_  SANDBY,  COSWAY,  RIGAUD,  REECHEY,  TIJKSHAM. 


^^^^ 


THJb:  KUYAJ^  AUAUiLMY  :  Lib  UKlLrllN  AiMJ  nia  IV^JK.  I 

fV»o  o^<-nol  /-/-.t-i<-rr>1      thf^  Prnwn  V>as  not  to  P'lve  an  account 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
interesting  not  only  as  an  expression  of  his  personal  opinion,  but 
also  because  it  embodies  many  ideas  which  were  afterwards  put  into 
a  practical  form  by  the  Royal  Academy  itself.    His  scheme  is  worth 
quoting  : 

"  It  is  proposed  that  a  house  be  taken  with  a  sufficient  number  of 
rooms  :  two  contiguous  to  each  other  for  drawing  and  modelling 
from  life  ;  one  for  architecture  and  perspective  ;  one  for  drawing 
frorn  plaster  ;  one  for  receiving  the  works  of  the  school  ;  one  for  the 
exhibition  of  them  ;  and  others  for  a  housekeeper  and  servants. 
"That  sortie  fine  pictures,  casts,  bustos,  bas-relievos,  intaglias, 
antiquity,  history,  architecture,  drawings,  and  prints,  be  purchased. 
"That  there  be  professors  of  anatomy,  geometry,  perspective^ 
architecture,  and  such  other  sciences  as  are  necessary  to  a  painter,, 
sculptor,  or  architect. 

"  That  the  professors  do  read  lectures  at  stated  times  on  constituent 
parts  of  their  several  arts,  the  resources  on  which  they  are  founded,, 
and  the  precision  and  immutabihty  of  the  objects  of  true  taste,  with 
proper  cautions  against  all  caprice  and  affectation. 
"  That  living  models  be  provided  of  different  characters,  to  stand  five 
nights  in  the  week. 

"  That  every  professor  do  present  the  Academy  with  a  piece  of  his 
performance  at  admission. 

"  That  no  scholar  draw  from  the  Hfe  till  he  has  gone  through  the 
previous  classes,  and  given  proof  of  his  capacity. 
"  That  a  certain  number  of  medals  be  annually  given  to  such  students 
as  shall  distinguish  themselves  most. 

"  That  every  student  after  he  has  practised  a  certain  time,  and  given 
some  proofs  of  his  abiHty,  may  be  a  candidate  for  a  fellowship. 
"  That  such  of  the  Fellows  as  choose  to  travel  to  Rome  to  complete 
their  studies,  do  make  a  composition  from  some  given  subject,  as  a 
proof  of  their  ability.  He  who  shall  obtain  the  preference  shall  be 
sent  with  salary  sufficient  to  maintain  him  decently  a  certain  time^ 
during  which  he  is  to  be  employed  in  copying  pictures,  antique 
statues,  or  bas-relievos,  drawing  from  ancient  fragments  or  such  new 
structures  as  may  advance  his  art,  such  pieces  to  be  the  property  of 
the  Society. 

"  That  other  medals  of  greater  value,  or  some  badges  of  distinc- 
tion, be  given  pubHcly  to  those  who  shall  manifest  uncommon 
excellence. 

"  That  some  professors  should  be  well  skilled  in  ornaments,  fruits, 
flowers,  birds,  beasts,  &c.,  that  they  may  instruct  the  students  in 
these  subjects,  which  are  of  great  use  in  our  manufactories. 

R  iii 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
"  That  drawing  masters  for  such  schools  as  may  be  wanted  in  several 
parts  of  the  kingdom  be  appointed  by  the  professors,  under  the  seal 
of  the  Academy. 

"That  a  housekeeper  shall  continually  reside  at  the  Academy,  to 
keep  everything  in  order,  and  not  suffer  any  piece  to  go  out  of  the 
house  without  a  proper  warrant." 

Between  this  plan  of  Evelyn's  and  that  drawn  up  more  than  a 
century  later  by  the  men  who  organised  the  Royal  Academy  there 
are  similarities  which  are  probably  more  than  coincidences,  so  that 
his  excellent  ideas  on  the  subject  may  be  said  to  have  ultimately 
borne  good  fruit.  But  in  his  own  time  no  attempt  was  made  to 
carry  them  out.  Nothing,  in  fact,  was  done  for  the  advancement  of 
art  education  until  after  1700,  when  Sir  Godfrey  Kneller,  the 
painter  of  Sovereigns  and  Court  beauties,  started  a  private  school, 
which  seems  to  have  continued  till  his  death  in  1723.  Not  long 
after.  Sir  James  Thornhill,  the  historical  painter  to  George  I.,  drew 
up  a  scheme  for  an  Academy  which,  with  an  estimate  of  the  cost  of 
carrying  it  out,  he  submitted  to  the  Government.  Assistance  was, 
however,  refused  by  the  Treasury,  so  with  commendable  public  spirit 
he  opened  a  school  at  his  house  in  James  Street,  Covent  Garden. 
This  school,  during  the  comparatively  short  period  of  its  existence, 
became  sufficiently  popular  to  prove  to  the  artists  of  the  time  that 
some  such  institution  ought  to  be  estabhshed  on  a  permanent  basis. 
Accordingly,  not  long  after  Thornhill's  death  a  few  men,  headed  by 
G.  M.  Moser,  combined  together  and  started  a  class,  first  in  Arundel 
Street,  Strand,  and  later  in  Peter's  Court,  St.  Martin's  Lane,  which 
had  during  many  years  a  quietly  prosperous  career.  In  its  formation 
some  part  was  played  by  WilUam  Hogarth,  who  proposed  that  every 
member  of  the  association  should  pay  a  fixed  subscription  towards 
the  cost  of  its  maintenance  and  have  an  equal  share  in  the  conduct 
of  its  affairs.  This  suggestion  was  adopted,  and  Hogarth  gave 
further  help  by  handing  over  the  school  furniture  which  had 
belonged  to  his  father-in-law,  Thornhill. 

It  may  fairly  be  said  that  this  small  association  of  a  few  artists 
anxious  for  chances  of  self-improvement  was  the  direct  ancestor  of 
the  Royal  Academy  which  was  founded  thirty  years  later.  Educated 
people  outside  the  profession  were  now  far  more  inclined  to  take  an 
interest  in  artistic  questions,  and  a  conviction  that  some  strong 
organisation  was  needed  to  undertake  the  responsibility  of  a  system 
of  general  art  education  was  becoming  widespread.  One  evidence 
of  the  growth  of  this  feeUng  was  provided  in  1749,  when  the 
Society  of  Dilettanti  conceived  the  idea  of  establishing  a  gallery  of 
R  iv 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

"  ■>       /-  r  .1     i_r  I. 


COI'LEY,  WYATT,  VENN,  BOURGEOIS. 


A^i^^,    7*~^.v.    v^-**--^*-  ji^-f  • 

/ 

i/-?-^  ^€^^^-  ^^t.^^^  ,  y''^^ 


tr<^  -y-ti 


7 

^  ----    ^  ' 

^<C':Ar^-^    /^^"^^^'V      "^^^"^    ''^^  ^ 


'7,.^^^  -^.^^*«>-^' 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

works  of  art  and  of  casts  from  the  antique,  and  of  making  this 
gallery  a  properly  equipped  teaching-place  with  a  staff  of  qualified 
professors.  By  1753  this  scheme  had  advanced  so  far  that  a  site  had 
been  bought  in  Cavendish  Square  and  a  supply  of  stone  for  the 
erection  of  the  building. 

But  for  the  proper  working  out  of  its  idea  the  Society  ot  Dilettanti 
had  to  seek  the  collaboration  of  the  members  of  the  St.  Martin's 
Lane  Academy  ;  and  these  men,  who  now  called  themselves  the 
Society  of  Artists,  were  by  no  means  disposed  to  hand  over  to 
another  body  the  authority  they  had  acquired.  Indeed,  they  made 
such  demands  and  insisted  so  strongly  that  the  management  of  the 
new  school  should  be  left  entirely  to  them,  that  at  last  the  Society 
of  Dilettanti  abandoned  their  project  in  the  belief  that  they  would 
be  excluded  from  all  part  in  the  working  of  an  institution  which 
was  to  be  created  and  maintained  at  their  expense.  Even  among 
the  artists  themselves  there  was  great  diversity  of  opinion  concerning 
the  advantage  of  creating  a  school  on  so  ambitious  a  scale  ;  Hogarth 
opposed  the  scheme,  and  he  had  with  him  many  others  who  viewed 
it  with  strong  disfavour. 

Yet  only  two  years  later  a  similar  suggestion  was  under  discussion. 
This  time  it  was  proposed  to  found  "The  Royal  Academy  of 
London,  for  the  Improvement  of  Painting,  Sculpture,  and  Archi- 
tecture," with  a  president,  thirty  directors,  fellows,  and  scholars.  A 
committee  was  formed  to  arrange  preliminaries,  and  the  co-operation 
of  the  Society  of  Dilettanti  was  again  invoked.  But  again  the 
scheme  failed,  partly  for  want  of  public  support  and  partly  because 
the  Dilettanti,  made  probably  more  wary  by  their  recent  experience, 
would  not  assent  to  anything  which  tended  to  narrow  their  sphere 
of  activity.  They  wanted,  naturally,  to  have  a  voice  in  setting  the 
policy  of  an  institution  which  was  to  be,  nominally  at  all  events, 
under  their  patronage,  while  the  artists,  with  their  usual  jealousy  of 
men  who  patronised  but  did  not  practise  art,  wished  to  avoid  every- 
thing that  looked  like  interference  in  an  artistic  association  which 
was  to  benefit  art  workers  rather  than  the  public. 
Meanwhile,  another  influence  was  developing,  which  was  destined  to 
have  a  definite  effect  upon  these  negotiations  between  the  artists  and 
the  art  lovers.  In  1754  the  "  Society  for  the  Encouragement  of 
Arts,  Manufactures,  and  Commerce  in  Great  Britain"  had  been 
brought  into  existence  by  the  efforts  of  a  few  men  of  taste,  and  it 
had  become  almost  at  once  something  of  a  power  in  the  art  world 
because  it  offered  prizes  and  other  rewards  to  young  artists  who 
were  capable  of  doing  good  work  in  painting,  sculpture,  and  archi- 

R  V 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

tecture.  So  when  a  committee  of  artists  decided  that  it  would  be  to 
their  advantage  to  hold  an  annual  exhibition  of  their  works  and  to 
give  the  public  an  opportunity  of  seeing  what  was  being  done  hy- 
men of  ability,  it  was  natural  enough  that  the  place  chosen  for  this 
exhibition  should  have  been  the  rooms  occupied  by  the  Society  of 
Arts.  When  the  artists  asked  for  permission  to  use  the  rooms  the 
Society  readily  responded,  with  the  sole  condition  that  no  charge 
should  be  made  except  for  the  catalogues  of  the  show.  Even  with 
this  restriction,  the  venture  was  financially  a  very  definite  success. 
The  collection,  which  consisted  of  a  hundred  and  thirty  works  by 
sixty-nine  artists,  was  on  view  from  April  21  to  May  8,  1760,  and 
the  attendance  was  so  good  that  after  all  expenses  had  been  paid  a 
profit  of  £100  remained. 

When,  in  the  following  year,  the  artists  wished  to  hold  their  second 
exhibition  they  tried  to  evade  the  former  stipulation  as  to  free 
admission  and  to  make  the  purchase  of  a  catalogue,  which  was  to 
serve  also  as  a  season  ticket,  compulsory  on  all  visitors.  To  this, 
however,  the  Society  of  Arts  would  not  agree,  so  the  promoters  of 
the  show  split  up  into  two  parties,  each  of  which  organised  an 
exhibition  on  its  own  account.  One  occupied  the  rooms  of  the 
Society  of  Arts  and  adhered  to  the  original  conditions,  the  other 
took  a  room  in  Spring  Gardens  and  called  itself  the  "  Society  ot 
Artists  of  Great  Britain "  ;  the  former  association,  which  was 
formally  enrolled  in  1763  under  the  title  "A  Free  Society  of 
Artists,"  continued  for  a  while  to  exhibit  in  the  rooms  of  the 
Society  of  Arts,  then  moved  to  other  quarters,  and  finally  ceased 
to  exist  in  1778. 

The  Society  of  Artists  had  a  much  more  active  career.  Its  in- 
dependence was  amply  justified  by  results,  for  in  its  first  exhibition 
at  Spring  Gardens,  where  the  idea  of  using  the  catalogue  as  a 
voucher  for  admission  was  put  in  force,  the  visitors  numbered 
thirteen  thousand  ;  and  as  years  went  on  its  prosperity  increased.  In 
1765  it  received  a  charter  of  incorporation,  and  was  known  thence- 
forward as  "  The  Incorporated  Society  of  Artists  of  Great  Britain." 
This  definition  of  its  position  seems  to  have  inspired  it  with  the 
belief  that  it  ought  to  become  a  teaching  institution  as  well  as 
an  exhibiting  one,  and  it  began  to  consider  how  it  could  best  arrange 
this  addition  to  its  responsibilities.  A  house  was  eventually  taken  in 
Pall  Mall,  to  which  were  removed  the  effects  of  the  St.  Martin's 
Lane  School,  and  over  the  door  was  inscribed  "The  Royal  Academy." 
Apparently  there  was  some  justification  for  this  suggestion  of  Royal 
patronage.  The  King  had,  in  some  manner  not  explained,  given 
R  vi 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 


L.  S.— PAUL  SANDIiY,  R.  A. 


C<rV  i 


«^        (TfJ^^     ^^r^fr^ ^  y  ^ ^^^^^^ 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

countenance  to  the  scheme,  and  had  subscribed  £ioo  to  the  funds  of 
the  society. 

Not  long  after  various  dissensions  arose  between  two  sections  of  the 
association.  On  one  side  were  the  twenty-four  directors  by  whom 
its  affairs  had  hitherto  been  managed,  on  the  other  was  a  group  of 
men  who  were  anxious  to  fill  the  positions  of  authority  from  which 
they  held  that  they  were  unjustly  excluded.  These  dissensions 
came  to  a  head  in  the  autumn  of  1768,  when  the  opposition  by  its 
superiority  of  numbers  succeeded  in  carrying  its  scheme  of  reform, 
in  ousting  sixteen  of  the  directors,  and  in  electing  a  new  president 
and  secretary.  About  a  month  later  the  remaining  eight  directors, 
seeing  that  their  position  had  become  impossible,  sent  in  their 
resignation  in  a  body.  Many  members  who  sympathised  with 
them  also  retired  ;  and  as  these  seceders  included  some  of  the  ablest 
artists  of  the  time  the  effect  of  the  reformers'  action  was  to 
diminish  greatly  the  authority  of  the  Incorporated  Society,  and 
to  seriously  weaken  its  position. 

No  time  was  wasted  by  the  seceding  party  in  vain  regrets.  With 
wonderful  promptitude  they  set  to  work  to  create  for  themselves  a 
better  position  than  the  one  from  which  they  had  been  driven. 
A  committee  of  four,  Moser,  Cotes,  Chambers,  and  West,  was 
appointed  at  once  to  draw  up  a  scheme  for  the  formation  of  a  new 
society,  and  with  great  shrewdness  they  began  by  enlisting  the 
sympathy  of  the  King.  So  quickly  did  they  dispose  of  preliminaries 
that,  although  the  resignation  of  the  eight  directors  had  not  taken 
place  till  the  loth  of  November,  on  the  28  th  a  memorial  signed  by 
twenty-two  artists — among  them  West,  Richard  Wilson,  Moser, 
Cipriani,  George  Barret,  Paul  Sandby,  Edward  Penny,  Francis 
Cotes,  and  Bartolozzi — was  ready  for  presentation  to  George  III. 
This  memorial  was  well  received,  a  general  consent  was  given  to  the 
scheme  by  the  King,  and  fuller  details  were  asked  for  so  as  to  enable 
him  to  come  to  a  final  decision.  Some  slight  delay  was  caused  at 
this  stage  by  the  hesitation  of  Reynolds,  whom  the  artists  desired  to 
make  president  of  the  projected  society.  He  was  first  sounded  on 
the  subject  by  Penny,  but  refused  to  take  any  part  in  the  proceedings ; 
then  West  was  sent,  and  his  persuasions  were  so  far  successful  that  he 
was  able  to  bring  Reynolds  to  the  meeting  of  artists  which  had  been 
called  together  to  settle  the  details  which  were  to  be  laid  before  the 
King  and  to  draw  up  a  list  of  officers.  When  Reynolds  appeared  he 
was  unanimously  voted  to  the  Presidency,  and,  though  even  then  he 
deferred  his  acceptance  for  some  days,  he  ultimately  agreed  to  fill  the 
post.    On  December  7  the  complete  scheme  was  presented  to  the 

R  vii 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
King,  and  three  days  later  he  signified  his  consent  by  writing  on  the 
document  drawn  up  by  the  artists,  "  I  approve  of  this  plan  ;  let  it  be 
put  into  execution." 

In  this  way  was  constituted  "The  Royal  Academy  ot  Arts  in 
London,  for  the  purpose  of  cultivating  and  improving  the  Arts  of 
Painting,  Sculpture,  and  Architecture."  It  may  be  questioned 
whether  even  the  men  who  were  most  strenuous  in  their  support  of 
the  scheme  which  had  been  drawn  up  in  such  haste,  and  carried 
through  in  so  unusual  a  manner,  realised  what  kind  of  institution  they 
were  calling  into  existence.  They  certainly  could  not  have  foreseen 
how  it  was  likely  to  develop,  or  what  a  commanding  position  it  was 
destined  to  take  among  the  art  societies  of  the  world.  Even  the 
severest  of  the  present-day  critics  of  the  Royal  Academy  must  admit 
that  exceptional  discretion  must  have  been  used  by  every  one 
concerned  in  its  operations,  and  that  a  remarkable  spirit  of 
loyalty  to  its  traditions  must  have  pervaded  the  whole  body  of 
members  to  make  possible  that  progi-ess  in  social  and  artistic 
authority  which  has  been  one  of  the  most  striking  features  of 
the  history  of  this  association.  No  doubt  the  Royal  patronage, 
which  has  been  accorded  by  every  occupant  of  the  British  throne 
since  1768,  has  counted  for  much  ;  but  in  a  self-governing  society 
making  its  own  rules  and  ordering  its  own  affairs,  the  chance  of 
internal  dissensions  is  always  present.  Nothing,  however,  has 
occurred  to  interfere  seriously  with  its  activity,  and  its  advance  in 
prosperity  has  been  without  a  break.  For  such  a  record  there  are  few 
precedents,  and  it  seems  the  more  surprising  when  the  condition  of 
British  art  in  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  is  taken  into 
account. 

The  "  Instrument,"  as  the  document  was  called,  which  had  been 
drawn  up  by  the  committee  of  artists  and  signed  by  the  King, 
followed  so  closely  both  in  its  general  Hues  and  in  its  details  the 
suggestions  made  by  John  Evelyn  a  century  before,  that  there  seems 
some  reason  for  assuming  that  his  ideal  scheme  had  been  laid  under 
contribution.  But  whether  the  agreement  between  his  views  and 
those  of  the  organisers  of  the  Royal  Academy  was  intentional,  or 
merely  a  coincidence,  is  scarcely  material ;  the  important  point  is  that 
at  last  a  way  had  been  found  of  establishing  an  art  society  under 
such  conditions  that  there  was  every  hope  of  its  becoming  per- 
manently useful.  The  Instrument  was  a  common-sense  statement  of 
the  working  principles  which  must  be  observed  by  any  association 
intending  to  become  influential  in  the  art  world.  It  embodied  all  the 
necessary  rules  and  regulations  for  the  working  of  an  Academy  which 
R  viii 


was  to  exercise  educational  functions  and  to  provide  £ 

A.  I,.  S. — SIR  THOMAS  LAWRENCP:,  P.  R.  A. 

irs 


0      T  1 


^  ^    ^'^^X'  i. 

^  ^   -         Z_  bich 


-4- 


^^^^  -t-^  /y^^^ 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
was  to  exercise  educational  functions  and  to  provide  facilities  for  the 
periodical  exhibition  of  works  of  art,  and  it  laid  down  a  number  of 
laws  for  ensuring  the  proper  management  of  the  affairs  of  the  society. 
In  accordance  with  its  provisions  the  number  of  members  was  limited 
to  forty,  of  whom  thirty-four  were  appointed  at  the  outset,  two  were 
added  early  in  1769,  and  the  remaining  four  shortly  afterwards.  On 
December  14,  1768,  four  days  after  the  King  had  appended  his 
signature  to  the  Instrument,  the  Academicians  met  and  signed  a  kind 
of  acknowledgment,  in  which  they  agreed  to  observe  all  the  regula- 
tions laid  down  in  the  document,  and  promised  "  on  every  occasion  to 
employ  our  utmost  endeavours  to  promote  the  honour  and  interest  of 
the  establishment,  so  long  as  we  shall  continue  members  thereof* ; 
and  formal  appointments  were  made  of  Reynolds  as  President, 
G.  M.  Moser  as  Keeper,  F.  M.  Newton  as  Secretary,  and  others  as 
Visitors  and  Members  of  the  Council.  Three  days  later  a  general 
assembly  was  held,  at  which  the  first  professors  were  elected  by 
ballot — Edward  Penny  for  painting,  Thomas  Sandby  for  architecture. 
Dr.  William  Hunter  for  anatomy,  and  Samuel  Wale  for  perspective. 
So  far  the  whole  of  these  proceedings  had  been,  by  the  King's  desire, 
kept  a  profound  secret.  The  first  announcement  of  the  existence  of 
the  Royal  Academy  was  made,  according  to  the  story  told  in  John 
Gait's  "  Life  of  Benjamin  West,"  by  the  King  himself  West  had 
brought  his  picture  of  "  Regulus "  to  Windsor  Castle  for  the 
inspection  of  the  King  and  Queen,  and  while  they  were  examining 
the  painting,  Kirby,  the  new  President  of  the  Incorporated  Society 
of  Artists,  arrived,  and  was  admitted.  He  was  introduced  to  West, 
admired  the  "  Regulus,"  and  said  :  "  I  hope,  Mr.  West,  that  you 
intend  to  exhibit  this  picture."  West  replied  :  "  It  is  painted  for  the 
Palace,  and  its  exhibition  must  depend  upon  his  Majesty's  pleasure." 
"  Assuredly,"  said  the  King  ;  "  I  shall  be  very  happy  to  let  the  work 
be  shown  to  the  public."  "  Then,  Mr.  West,"  said  Kirby,  "  you  will 
send  it  to  my  exhibition  ?  "  "  No,"  interposed  the  King,  "  it  must 
go  to  my  exhibition — to  that  of  the  Royal  Academy."  Kirby, 
shocked  and  humiliated,  retired,  and  not  long  afterwards  presented  on 
behalf  of  the  Incorporated  Society  a  petition  in  which,  among  other 
matters,  a  plea  was  advanced  for  the  King's  exclusive  patronage.  To 
this  he  received  a  reply  that  "the  Society  had  his  Majesty's 
protection  ;  that  he  did  not  mean  to  encourage  one  set  of  men  more 
than  another  ;  that  having  extended  his  favour  to  the  Society  by 
Royal  Charter,  he  had  also  encouraged  the  new  petitioners  ;  that  his 
intention  was  to  patronise  the  arts  ;  and  that  he  should  visit  the 
exhibition  as  usual."    But  the  King's  real  intention  may  be  judged 

R  ix 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
from  the  fact  that  in  1769  he  visited  the  exhibition  of  the 
Incorporated  Society  for  the  last  time,  and  presented  to  it  his  last 
donation  of  £100.  His  sympathies  were  for  the  future  reserved  for 
the  Royal  Academy  ;  and  the  Incorporated  Society,  deprived  of  his 
support  and  unable  to  hold  its  own  against  its  rival,  finally  expired  in 
1 79 1,  after  undergoing  various  vicissitudes.  Its  books,  papers,  and 
charter  were  presented  by  its  last  surviving  member,  Mr.  Robert 
Pollard,  to  the  Academy  in  1836. 

The  new  society  lost  no  time  in  getting  to  work  after  the  formalities 
of  its  founding  had  been  completed.  Within  a  month  it  was  busy 
with  the  arrangemements  for  the  school  which  was  to  be  one  of  its 
most  useful  spheres  of  activity,  and  this  school  was  duly  opened  at 
the  beginning  of  January  1769,  in  some  rooms  in  Pall  Mall.  At  the 
opening,  Reynolds,  who  had  just  received  the  honour  of  knighthood, 
delivered  the  first  of  his  admirable  discourses,  and  dwelt  at  some 
length  upon  the  purpose  and  intentions  of  the  Academy,  and  upon 
the  advantages  which  the  institution  enjoyed  under  the  Royal 
patronage.  Three  months  later,  in  March  1769,  notices  were  issued 
concerning  the  coming  exhibition,  the  first  of  the  long  series  which 
has  continued  without  a  break  to  the  present  day.  These  notices 
desired  "  artists  who  intend  to  exhibit  with  the  Academicians  to  send 
their  several  works  to  the  Royal  Academy,  in  Pall  Mall,  on  Thursday, 
the  13th  of  April,  or  before  six  o'clock  in  the  evening  of  Friday  the 
14th  ;  after  which  time  no  performance  will  be  received."  On 
Wednesday,  April  26,  the  exhibition  was  opened,  and  was  continued 
for  a  month.  It  contained  a  hundred  and  thirty-six  works,  nearly 
eighty  of  which  were  by  members  ;  and  as  it  was  very  well  attended, 
it  produced  a  sum  which  fell  short  by  only  a  few  shillings  of  £yoo. 
The  expenditure  of  the  Academy  in  its  first  year  of  working  so  far 
exceeded  its  receipts,  however,  that  a  contribution  of  over  £goo  was 
necessary  from  the  King. 

During  this  year  some  changes  were  introduced  into  the  constitution 
as  set  forth  in  the  Instrument,  changes  which  aimed  at  making  the 
society  more  efficient  and  more  fully  representative.  One  of  these 
was  the  regulation  agreed  to  on  March  25,  under  which  "  a  number 
of  engravers,  not  exceeding  six,  shall  be  admitted  Associates  of  the 
Royal  Academy  "  ;  the  other,  passed  on  December  1 1  at  a  General 
Assembly,  created  "  a  new  order,  or  rank  of  members,  to  be  called 
Associates  of  the  Royal  Academy."  These  Associates  were  to  be  in 
addition  to  the  engravers  already  agreed  upon  ;  they  were  to  be 
twenty  in  number,  and  to  be  chosen  from  among  the  painters, 
sculptors,  and  architects  who  might  contribute  to  the  exhibitions. 

R  X 


They  were  also  intended  to  form  a  class  from  wh: 

•  1  .    A  _j  -^-uld 

—p.  J.  I)E  LOIjTHERBOURG,  R.  A. 

4j/^^'^^^ ^^^n^  r>tA^*^^  A  ^i^***— 

k 


3ciety  for  the  last  time,  and  presented  to  it  his  last 

u:  .u:  r.  ..  .1      r  . 

lerm 

ible 

lerg( 

irese 

Aca( 

y  lo! 

hac 
;eme 
leres 
>fja 
)lds, 
irst 
s  pu 

wh 
iree 

con: 
ivith 

wh< 
)rks 
)ril, 
hich 
)ril  : 

It  C( 

1  we 
im  \ 
•e  of 
:eipt 
the  : 
ir  so 
:he  ] 
fficie 
ion  ; 
ot  e? 

ted  ' 
le  R 
e  en 
iber, 
arch 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
They  were  also  intended  to  form  a  class  from  which  vacancies  which 
might  occur  among  the  Academicians  should  be  filled.  Sixteen 
Associates  were  elected  under  this  new  rule  during  1770,  and  five 
Associate  engravers.  A  sixth  engraver  was  added  in  the  following 
year,  but  the  full  number  of  Associates  was  not  made  up  until  1773. 
The  second  exhibition  of  the  Academy  was  even  more  successful 
than  the  first  ;  it  produced  over  £(^Jo,  and  the  deficiency,  which  had 
to  be  met  by  the  King,  was  reduced  in  consequence  to  a  little  under 
£730. 

P'urther  evidence  of  the  King's  interest  in  the  society,  the  establish- 
ment of  which  he  had  done  so  much  to  encourage,  was  provided  in 
1 77 1,  when,  by  his  command,  rooms  were  assigned  to  the  Academy 
in  Somerset  House,  which  was  at  that  time  one  of  the  Royal  palaces. 
These  rooms  were  utilised  for  the  purposes  of  the  school,  and  included 
a  library  and  council  chamber,  in  which  the  meetings  of  the 
members  were  held,  and  the  business  of  the  society  conducted  ;  the 
gallery  in  Pall  Mall  was  still  used  for  the  annual  exhibitions,  which 
were  held  there  for  another  nine  years,  until  in  1780  the  Academy 
was  provided  with  accommodation  which  allowed  it  to  carry  on  the 
whole  of  its  operations  under  one  roof.  As  years  passed,  its  financial 
position  became  more  secure,  and  the  demands  made  upon  the  King 
for  contributions  to  meet  the  annual  deficiency  were  steadily  reduced. 
After  1780,  by  which  date  the  total  amount  he  had  given  came  to  over 
j(^5ooo,  the  Academy  was  able  to  pay  its  way  without  assistance,  and 
had  no  longer  any  need  to  ask  for  money  to  properly  balance  its 
accounts.  In  twelve  years  it  had  tided  over  the  difficulties  inevitable 
in  the  earlier  stages  of  such  an  institution,  and  had  prepared  an 
excellent  foundation  for  its  future  developments. 
Not  long  after  the  Academy  had  been  accommodated  at  Somerset 
House,  that  building  was  transferred  from  the  Crown  to  the  Govern- 
ment, and  was  converted  into  public  offices.  In  making  this  change, 
however,  the  King  took  care  that  the  society  for  which  he  had  done 
and  was  still  doing  so  much  should  not  suffisr  in  any  way.  He 
reserved  to  himself  the  right  to  house  it  and  other  learned  societies  in 
a  certain  part  of  the  new  building,  and  early  in  1780  the  Academy 
was  notified  that  the  rooms  specially  designed  for  it  in  the  block 
facing  the  Strand  were  ready  for  occupation  ;  these  rooms  included  a 
gallery  on  the  ground  floor  for  exhibiting  sculpture  and  drawings,  a 
library,  a  lecture-room,  and  other  apartments  for  the  use  of  students, 
on  the  first  floor,  and  above,  a  large  gallery  in  which  the  annual 
exhibitions  were  to  be  held.  Here  the  Academy  was  able  to  carry 
on  its  work  to  the  best  advantage,  and  under  conditions  which 

R  xi 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
relieved  it  from  all  anxiety  as  to  its  future.  As  soon  as  it  entered 
into  possession  of  its  new  home— which  it  was  destined  to  occupy 
for  fifty-seven  years— it  proceeded  to  fit  up  and  decorate  the  rooms  in 
an  appropriate  and  attractive  manner.  Ceilings  were  painted  by 
Reynolds,  West,  and  AngeHca  Kauffmann  ;  other  painted  decorations 
were  carried  out  by  Cipriani,  and  Biaggio  Rebecca,  and  sculptured 
details  by  Carlini  and  Nollekens  were  also  introduced.  The  general 
effect  of  the  interior  so  ornamented  is  said  to  have  been  extremely 
dignified  and  quite  expressive  of  the  purposes  of  the  institution. 
The  first  exhibition  at  Somerset  House  was  opened  on  May  i,  1780. 
It  included  four  hundred  and  eighty-nine  works  by  many  of  the  most 
famous  artists  of  the  day— among  them  Revnolds,  West,  Gains- 
borough, Richard  Wilson,  Stothard,  Sandby,  Beechey,  Cosway,  and 
De  Loutherbourg— and  it  excited  a  great  deal  of  attention.  Vhe 
merits  of  the  show  and  the  curiosity  of  the  public  concerning  the  new 
galleries  caused  a  marked  increase  in  the  number  of  visitors,  and  the 
total  receipts  amounted  to  over  jCsooo.  This  accession  of  prosperity 
put  the  Academy  finally  on  its  feet  ;  it  received  a  contribution  of 
^144  in  that  year  from  the  King,  but  this  was  the  last  occasion  on 
which  any  demand  upon  the  privy  purse  was  necessary. 
It  was  now  in  a  position  of  authority,  a  recognised  institution  which 
could  defy  competition  and  could  look  forward  with  reasonable  con- 
fidence to  an  honourable  career.  As  a  teaching  centre,  where  students 
could  receive  a  proper  education  under  masters  of  acknowledged 
eminence,  it  had  sufficiently  proved  its  value,  and  as  a  medium  for 
bringing  artists  before  the  public  its  usefulness  was  undisputed. 
Indeed,  that  there  was  a  general  desire  among  the  members  of  the 
profession  to  be  represented  in  its  exhibitions  can  be  seen  by  the 
outcry  which  was  even  then  raised  by  the  men  whose  works  were 
occasionally,  to  use  the  present  day  term,  "crowded  out"  of  the 
exhibitions.  The  want  of  space  difficulty  seems  to  have  become 
pressing  in  the  very  early  days  of  the  Academy  history  ;  and  though 
It  has  in  modern  times  grown  in  a  marked  manner  on  account 
of  the  greater  disproportion  between  the  available  wall-space  at  the 
disposal  of  the  Academy  and  the  number  of  would-be  contributors,, 
there  seems  to  have  been  long  before  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
century  very  serious  heartburnings  over  the  decisions  of  the  com- 
mittees by  which  the  periodical  shows  were  arranged.  Appeals  to 
the  President  and  to  members  of  the  Council  on  behalf  of  artists 
who  considered  themselves  slighted  were  not  infrequent  ;  there  is  an 
instance  of  an  eloquent  intercession  made  by  Dr.  Samuel  Johnson  to 
obtain  a  revision  of  the  verdict  pronounced  by  the  hangers-on  the 
R  xii 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY:  ITS  ORIGIN  AMn  HTSTOTJV 

S. — HENRY  FUSELl,  R.A. 


fJnY  ^^  -^   ^ 


■^H"jyf»i^  /i?,  .4/ws-  TM  emf- 

tola  j/:^  r/^Ujif/  HddfiL  mip^umK . 


-frio  /tf^rM.  a/j^o^^  ^Md/ 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY:  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 
works  of  a  painter  who  was  a  friend  of  his — an  intercession  which, 
it  may  be  remarked,  resulted  in  the  admission  of  the  rejected  pictures. 
But  such  episodes  are  only  important  because  they  suggest  that 
acceptance  by  the  Academy  was  regarded  at  this  early  stage  in  its 
history  as  to  some  considerable  extent  setting  a  seal  upon  an  artist's 
claims  to  popularity. 

The  next  important  event  to  be  noted  is  the  death  of  Sir  Joshua 
Reynolds,  on  February  23,  1792.  He  had  held  the  Presidency  for 
nearly  four  and  twenty  years,  and  had  shown  himself  in  every  way 
fitted  for  this  responsible  position.  The  relations  between  him  and 
the  other  members  had  been  excellent  throughout  ;  few  of  the  dis- 
agreements practically  inevitable  in  a  society  which  was  creating  the 
precedents  by  which  its  operations  were  to  be  guided  in  years  to 
come  had  occurred  to  mar  the  progress  of  affairs,  and  those  which 
did  arise  were  easily  smoothed  over.  He  had  seen  some  extensive 
changes  in  the  membership  of  the  Academy  during  his  tenure  of 
office.  Eighteen  of  the  Academicians  had  died,  two  of  the 
Associates,  and  two  of  the  Associate  Engravers  ;  and  twenty-five 
Academicians — nineteen  painters,  four  sculptors,  and  two  architects 
— had  been  elected.  Two  of  these  were  appointed  by  the  King,  and 
others  were  chosen  by  the  vote  of  the  members,  soon  after  the 
creation  of  the  society,  to  bring  the  total  number  on  the  roll  up 
to  the  full  forty  required  by  the  Instrument.  With  the  death  of 
Reynolds  ended  the  first,  and  in  some  respects  the  most  important, 
chapter  in  the  history  of  the  Academy.  He  was  succeeded  in  the 
Presidency  by  Benjamin  West,  who  held  the  post  until  his  death  in 
1820,  except  for  twelve  months  in  1805-6,  when  James  Wyatt  took 
his  place.  When  he  died  there  remained  alive  three  only  out  of 
the  original  forty  Academicians.  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence  was  the  next 
President,  and  he  was  followed  in  succession  by  Sir  Martin  Archer 
Shee  (1830-1850),  Sir  C.  L.  Eastlake  (1850-1865),  Sir  Francis 
Grant  (i  866-1 878),  and  in  more  recent  times  by  Lord  Leighton, 
Sir  J.  E.  Millais,  and  Sir  E.  J.  Poynter. 

In  1837  the  Government,  having  decided  to  convert  the  whole  of 
Somerset  House  into  public  offices,  housed  the  Academy  in  the  new 
National  Gallery  which  had  just  been  built  in  Trafalgar  Square.  A 
few  years  later  these  rooms  were  required  for  the  extension  of  the 
National  Gallery,  and  for  some  while  a  discussion  went  on  as  to  the 
arrangements  which  could  be  made  to  provide  for  the  Academy, 
which  was  generally  admitted  to  have  definite  claims  to  considera- 
tion. Suggestions  were  made  in  Parliament  that  it  should  be  ousted 
without  compensation,  although  there  had  been  already  an  offer  on 

R  xiii 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY  :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

the  part  of  the  Government  to  pay  it  the  sum  of  ,£40,000  to  defray 
the  cost  of  erecting  new  galleries.  Finally,  in  1863  the  whole 
question  was  submitted  to  a  Royal  Commission,  which  reported  "  that 
the  Royal  Academy  have  no  legal,  but  that  they  have  a  moral  claim 
to  apartments  at  the  public  expense,"  and  suggested  various  ways  of 
disposing  of  the  existing  difficulties.  This  amounted  to  an  acknow- 
ledgment that  the  institution,  though  independent  of  all  State  control, 
had  acquired  a  right  which  the  Government  could  not  equitably  ignore. 
Nothing,  however,  was  done  until  1866,  when  the  Academy  renewed 
certain  negotiations,  which  had  been  opened  tentatively  some  time 
before,  for  a  lease  of  part  of  the  site  of  Burlington  House.  In  1867 
these  negotiations  were  successfully  concluded,  and  the  Academy  was 
granted  by  the  Government  a  lease  for  999  years,  at  a  peppercorn 
rent,  of  the  house  itself,  which  was  still  standing,  and  of  a  piece  of 
the  garden  at  the  back.  This  space  was  sufficient  for  the  erection  of 
schools  and  exhibition  galleries,  while  the  house,  to  which  some 
additions  were  made,  was  utilised  for  the  working  purposes  of  the 
society.  In  it  are  the  library,  the  council  chamber,  and  the  other 
rooms  to  which  members  only  have  access ;  and  there  are,  as  well, 
galleries  for  the  display  of  the  diploma  pictures  and  other  works 
which  are  the  property  of  the  Academy,  and  to  view  which  the 
public  are  admitted.  The  cost  of  these  additions  and  of  the  recon- 
struction of  Burlington  House  was  defrayed  by  the  society  out  of  its 
savings,  and  it  is  said  to  have  spent  more  than  60,000  on  its 
building  operations.  It  has  no  contribution  from  the  State  towards 
the  expenses  of  maintaining  the  place,  and  is  still  dependent  entirely 
upon  its  own  resources.  The  lease  under  which  it  holds  the  site 
specifies  that  "  the  premises  shall  be  at  all  times  exclusively  devoted 
to  the  cultivation  of  the  fine  arts,"  so  that  although  the  Academy 
owns  the  house  in  which  its  work  is  carried  on  it  cannot  use  it  for 
any  purpose  which  would  be  outside  its  scope  as  an  artistic  institu- 
tion. But  these  restrictions  help  to  define  its  position  and  to  give  it 
security  against  interference  in  the  future.  So  long  as  it  respects  its 
obligations,  and  makes  no  effort  to  evade  the  covenants  by  which  it 
is  bound,  it  is  free  to  manage  its  own  afi^airs,  and  no  official  inspec- 
tion or  supervision  can  be  imposed  upon  it.  To  its  credit  it  can  be 
said  that  it  has  not  shown  any  disposition  to  shirk  its  responsibilities 
as  the  leading  art  society  in  this  country,  and  that  it  has  gone  on  its 
way,  despite  frequent  criticism  and  opposition,  with  a  faith  in  itself 
that  commands  respect.  That  it  has  a  monopoly  of  infallibility 
would  be  too  much  to  claim  for  it ;  but  at  least  it  has  been  consistent 
and  self-respecting,  and  this  may  be  counted  to  it  as  a  virtue. 
R  xiv 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTO 

T3<»,r^.«J  ^1-  _         A    _-J   1  1 

-V/II.I.!  \M  l-'l  TY,  U.  ,V. 


0  €^1^4..  /(-(^dcc./-. 

^^^^^  . 


-   1  _r 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

Beyond  doubt  the  Academy  is  deeply  indebted  to  the  Crown  for 
many  favours  which  have  had  a  very  definite  effect  upon  its  develop- 
ment, and  have  helped  greatly  to  put  it  in  a  position  that  is  prac- 
tically unassailable.  The  grant  of  free  accommodation  made  to  it 
in  the  beginning  by  George  III.  saved  it  from  the  necessity  of  setting 
aside  any  portion  of  the  small  income  which  it  earned  during  the 
earlier  years  of  its  existence,  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  rent 
of  suitable  premises,  and  the  readiness  of  the  King  to  make  up 
deficiencies  in  its  annual  accounts  prevented  the  possibility  of  any 
accumulation  of  debts  which  might  have  hampered  its  later  progress. 
The  grant  of  accommodation  once  made  established,  moreover,  a 
precedent  which,  as  events  have  proved,  was  especially  helpful, 
"  a  moral  claim  to  apartments  at  the  public  expense,"  which  the 
many  opponents  of  the  institution,  and  the  many  critics  of  its 
privileges,  have  never  been  able  to  upset.  The  value  of  such  a  secure 
founding  can  be  seen  now  to  have  been  almost  inestimable  ;  it  was 
as  great  a  safeguard  against  internal  dissension  as  against  interference 
from  without,  and  it  made  unnecessary  from  the  very  first  any 
wranglings  over  petty  economies  or  any  appeals  to  the  public  for 
support. 

The  close  connection  with  the  Crown  has  been  scrupulously  main- 
tained. The  Academy  is  still  what  it  was  declared  to  be  in  a  note 
delivered  by  the  President  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  seventy 
years  ago,  "  a  private  institution,  under  the  patronage  and  protection 
of  the  King,  existing  by  his  will  and  pleasure,  communicating  imme- 
diately with  His  Majesty,  submitting  all  its  laws  and  proceedings  to 
his  sanction,  and  responsible  only  to  His  Majesty  for  the  manner  in 
which  its  concerns  are  administered."  The  direct  communication 
with  the  Sovereign  is  a  peculiar  privilege.  It  enables  the  President 
of  the  Academy  to  have  access  to  the  King  and  to  consult  with  him 
on  all  matters  affecting  the  interests  or  the  government  of  the  institu- 
tion, and  it  allows  the  chief  officers  of  the  Academy  to  submit  to 
him  personally  for  his  approval  the  proceedings  connected  with  the 
election  of  the  President  and  certain  other  officials,  and  to  ask  for 
his  sanction  to  new  laws  and  regulations.  All  proceedings  of  this 
nature  are  entered  in  a  special  volume,  called  "  The  King's  Book," 
and  these  entries  are  signed  by  the  Sovereign  and  not  countersigned 
by  any  Minister  of  State.  So  carefully  is  this  personal  connection 
preserved  that  the  Academy  will  not  divulge  any  of  its  affairs 
without  the  permission  of  the  Crown.  Of  this  habit  a  characteristic 
instance  was  afforded  in  1834,  when  a  member  of  Parliament  called 
in  the  House  of  Commons  for  returns  stating  certain  details  affecting 

R  XV 


THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY :  ITS  ORIGIN  AND  HISTORY 

the  working  of  the  Academy.  The  President,  however,  while 
expressing  his  wiUingness  to  provide  these  returns,  refused  to  recog- 
nise the  right  of  Parliament  to  make  any  such  demand,  and  the 
information  asked  for  was  not  furnished  until  the  King  had  been 
consulted  and  his  consent  obtained.  Other  instances  could  be  quoted 
to  show  how  consistently  the  Academy  has  observed  what  may 
fairly  be  called  the  essential  conditions  of  its  constitution  and  how 
judiciously  it  has  retained  the  exceptional  privileges  that  it  enjoys. 
It  has  had  through  the  long  years  of  its  existence  a  very  real  appre- 
ciation of  the  advantages  that  accrue  from  its  unusual  relations  with 
the  Crown,  and,  rightly  no  doubt,  it  has  always  been  impatient  of 
every  attempt — and  more  than  one  has  been  made — to  impose  upon 
it  reforms  which  would  change  its  character.  That  it  will  now, 
after  so  prolonged  an  experience,  alter  its  ways  in  response  to  outside 
suggestions  may  be  accounted  extremely  improbable. 

W.  K.  West. 


R  xvi 


F'OKTRAIT 


BT  OF  MS3S«!"    ERNEST    BROWN"   AND     FCTT.T .IP^ 


BY  ^OHN    OPIE,  R.A.. 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL 
ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

HERE  are  two  sorts  of  men  of  genius,  those 
who  submit  to  their  environment,  and  those 
whose  temperaments  and  characters  run 
counter  to  their  surroundings,  and  rule  some- 
times even  in  defiance  of  the  artists. 
Since  Hogarth  founded  the  purely  English 
school  of  painting,  each  of  these  two  classes  of 
genius  has  been  well  represented  in  English 
art  ;  but  by  far  the  more  numerous  representatives  belong  to 
the  first  class.  Indeed,  the  triumph  of  temperament  over  the 
conditions  of  life  has  been  so  rare,  that  we  find  only  a  few  such 
men  as  Cotman,  Miiller,  Alfred  Stevens,  and  Wilham  Blake. 
These  men  excepted,  one  may  say  with  strict  justice  that  the 
English  school  of  art  has  won  its  highest  honours  by  appealing 
directly  to  the  tastes  of  the  purchasing  public,  unassisted  by  any  of 
those  artificial  means  of  encouragement  which,  in  France  and  else- 
where on  the  Continent,  show  themselves  in  the  commissions  that 
promising  artists  receive  from  their  governments  or  from  their 
municipalities. 

This  thorough  dependence  on  the  public  taste  is  the  most  noteworthy 
fact  among  the  fundamental  things  to  be  found  in  the  history  of  the 
English  school.  Yet,  somehow,  it  is  a  truth  which  writers  on  art  in 
England  are  slow  to  recognise  ;  and,  as  a  consequence,  they  very 
frequently  go  wrong  in  the  estimates  they  form  of  the  great  majority 
of  English  painters.  It  is  absurd  for  any  one  to  write  of  English  art 
without  keeping  constantly  in  mind  the  near  relationship  existing 
between  that  art  and  the  strength  and  weakness  of  the  English 
character.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  any  other  school,  even  the 
Dutch,  has  a  closer  kinship  with  the  actual  life  and  tastes  of  a  given 
people.  A  good  student  of  English  social  history,  without  having 
seen  any  examples  of  English  painting,  might  divine  without  difficulty 
all  the  phases  of  pictorial  expression  into  which  the  genius  of  art  in 
England  has  divided  itself ;  and  he  would  probably  give  the  following 
list,  or  one  very  much  like  it : 

(a)  Portraiture,  appealing  to  the  pride  of  family  and  the  wish 

of  every  Englishman  of  birth  to  preserve  some  record  of  his 

ancestry ; 

(^)  Small  easel  pictures,  with  the  balance  of  effect  oscillating 

p  i 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
between  humour  of  no  real  depth  and  domestic  sentiment  of  an 
anecdotal  kind  ; 

(c)  A  great  regard  for  the  actual  truth  of  contemporary  manners 
and  contemporary  costume — a  truth  expressed  with  a  rather  laboured 
touch,  but  often  effective  by  reason  of  the  sincerity  of  purpose 
shown  in  the  patient  handling  ; 

(a)  MoraUsings,  frequently  of  a  copybook  kind,  often  tearful, 
and  sometimes  with  a  strong  bitterness  or  satire  ; 

{e)  Pictures  of  games  and  sports,  and  of  battles  by  land  and  sea, 
in  which  an  effort  to  be  true  and  historic  is  often  more  remarkable 
than  the  more  painter-like  qualities  that  a  French  artist  would 
strive  to  attain  ; 

(/)  River  scenes,  coast  scenes,  and  the  open  sea,  all  having  an 
astonishing  and  intuitive  understanding  of  the  life,  the  movement, 
the  changeful  majesty  and  might  of  water  ; 

{g)  Landscapes — the  most  impressive  being  home  landscapes, 
but  with  a  persistent  wish  to  get  away  from  home  surroundings 
and  seek  new  subjects  in  distant  countries.  Hence  a  certain 
cosmopolitanism  in  the  actual  subject-matter  ; 

(h)  Running  through  all  these  phases  a  certain  thoroughbred 
earnestness  and  depth  of  purpose  which  serve  to  reconcile  a  critic 
to  many  defects  of  art  training  ; 

(/)  A  certain  something,  often  indescribable,  that  not  only 
gives  the  work  a  pronounced  English  character,  but  that  proves 
that  the  EngUsh  genius  in  art  can  play  the  colonist  in  many 
countries,  and  yet  keep  its  own  integrity  and  its  own  handmark  ; 

(/)  A  classicism  more  or  less  firmly  based  on  a  careful  study  of 
the  old  masters  and  of  Greek  and  Roman  literature — a  study, 
frequently  enough,  that  is  more  literary  in  character  than  painter- 
like, but  yet  so  English,  despite  its  foreign  trappings,  that  it 
sometimes  commands  attention  and  admiration  by  virtue  of  its 
thoroughness  and  its  poetical  import. 
Such  are  the  main  departments  into  which  any  student  ot  English 
character  and  English  history  might  guess  that  the  English  school  of 
painting  would  be  divided.    Each  department  has  interests  ot  its 
own,  and  may  be  found  well  exemplified  in  the  story  of  the  Royal 
Academy.    It  will  be  well,  therefore,  to  study  the  painters  of  the 
Academy  under  the  several  classifications,  dwelHng  upon  each  one 
very  briefly.    But  before  a  start  is  made,  the  point  of  view  from 
which  the  present  subject  should  be  looked  at  throughout  ought  to 
be  reiterated.    It  is  not  a  point  of  view  of  high  abstract  aestheticism, 
but  a  standpoint  that  forces  us  to  take  into  account  the  incessant 
p  ii 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
pressure  that  the  conditions  of  life  have  exerted,  and  do  still 
exert,  upon  the  artist's  temperament  in  England,  compelling  it,  far 
more  often  than  not,  to  reach  its  allotted  height  of  greatness  even 
whilst  proving  to  its  patrons  that  those  who  live  to  please  must 
please  to  live. 

Portraiture.— '^htn  it  is  remembered  that  portraiture  followed  sign- 
painting  as  the  chief  mainstay  of  our  native  English  artists,  it  will  not 
seem  surprising  that  the  Foundation  Members  of  the  Academy  should 
have  been  largely  chosen  from  among  the  best  recognised  makers  ot 
likenesses.    At  their  head  stood  the  great  and  genial  Sir  Joshua 
Reynolds,  with  his  radiant  sanity  and  his  wholesome  and  invigorating 
joy  in  youth,  and  health,  and  love.    A  bachelor  himself,  he  yet 
dehghted  in  children  and  in  motherhood  :  and  ii  Hogarth  was  the 
father  of  the  English  school  of  painting,  Reynolds  was  certainly  the 
lather  of  the  English  art  or  portraying  the  family  life  of  an  epoch 
in  its  mothers  and  fathers,  and  their  offspring,    Reynolds'  children 
are  of  two  kinds  :  those  that  came  to  him  as  sitters  and  those  that  he 
transformed  into  pictures  through  the  exercise  of  a  certain  Puck-Hke 
gaiety  in  his  happy  genius.    It  is  doubtful  whether  some  of  these 
Fuck-hke  children  would  be  comfortable  to  live  with  day  by  day 
throughout  a  year ;  but  they  give  a  rare  grace  and  interest  to  a  public 
collection,  and  they  are  certainly  among  the  most  genuinely  original 
works  that  Sir  Joshua  created.    In  the  portraiture  of  women  he  con- 
trived, by  some  gift  of  penetrative  insight,  to  make  use  of  a  subtle 
flattery  by  means  of  which  the  mere  Hkeness  of  the  sitter  was  merged 
in  a  type  of  beautiful  womanhood,  a  type  that  belonged  to  his  own 
imagination.    Hence  all  his  women  have  a  certain  family  likeness, 
not  merely  in  their  cast  of  feature  and  expression,  but  also  in  their 
sweet  serene  grace  and  smiling  beauty.    But,  despite  that,  the 
actual  women  who  sat  must  have  been  in  these  pictures,  too,  for 
Reynolds  seldom  failed  to  delight  his  cHents.    In  thinking  of  these 
gracious  women  of  Sir  Joshua,  one  cannot  help  wondering  how  they 
managed  to  pass  their  lives  in  company  with  the  hard-riding,  hard- 
drinking  squires  and  country  gentlemen  whom  they  married.  Next 
as  regards  the  male  portraits,  what  could  be  finer  than  the  rugged  and 
ennobled  uncouthness  of  the  Lord  Heathfield  in  the  National  Gallery  ? 
It  embodies  all  the  qualities  that  one  would  wish  to  find  in  the 
portrait  of  a  taciturn  EngHshman  of  action  :  it  has  a  large  impressive- 
ness  a  bold  and  vigorous  handhng,  great  weight  in  technique,  and 
much  character  in  the  facial  expression. 

One  trait  in  the  portraiture  of  Reynolds  is  apt  to  be  disconcertincr 
especially  to  any  expert  to  whose  lot  has  fallen  a  reputation  beyond 


p  ill 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
the  wishes  of  its  owner.    It  was  often  a  custom  of  Reynolds  to  get 
the  draperies  and  even  the  hands  painted  by  an  assistant  That 
assistant,  as  a  rule,  perhaps,  was  Peter  Toms,  a  Foundation  Member 
of  the  Royal  Academy,  a  man  of  needy  circumstances,  but  ot  very 
real  ability.    Poor  Toms'  Hfe  was  a  tragic  one.    He  wearied  ot 
working  for  others,  of  living  unknown  and  at  second  hand  in  the 
reputations  of  his  employers.    Though  it  is  true  that  he  laboured 
for  the  greatest  painters  of  his  times— for  Sir  Joshua,  Gamsborough 
and  Francis  Cotes— this  did  not  reconcile  him  to  his  position  ot 
subserviency,  nor  to  the  inadequate  reward  of  his  undoubted  talents 
For  painting  the  draperies,  hands,  and  background  of  a  tull-length 
portrait  he  received  twenty  guineas,  and  for  a  three-quarter  portrait 
three  guineas.    Growing  discontented  with  his  lot,  and  recognising 
the  great  difficulty  of  breaking  away  from  his  subordinate  position, 
he  at  last  wrenched  himself  free  from  his  life  in  London  and  went 
to  Ireland  to  practise  as  a  portrait-painter  in  the  suite  ot  the  Lord- 
Lieutenant,  the  Duke  of  Northumberland.    But  fortune  remained 
still  his  foe:  commissions  did  not  come  to  him,  and  he  grew 
desperate  and  returned  to  London.    And  there,  being  still  pursued  by 
the  same  ill-luck,  he  lost  faith  in  himself  and  began  to  drink  :  until 
at  last,  in  1776,  he  took  life  so  very  seriously  that  he  put  an  end  to 
himself,   as   did   Turner's   master,  Edward  Dayes,  m  the  next 

ITother^unhappy  portrait-painter  among  the  Foundation  Members 
was  Nathaniel  Hone,  a  miniaturist,  who  worked  also  in  oil  and  in 
enamel.  Between  him  and  Reynolds  there  was  considerable  friction,  tor 
Hone  accused  his  President  of  pilfering  from  other  men  in  his  choice 
of  attitudes.    He  then  attacked  Angelica  KaufFman,  ^-A.,  a  Jriend  ot 
Reynolds,  and  soon  set  the  whole  Academy  by  the  ears.    When  this 
was  done,  he  began  to  nurse  a  sort  of  dropsical  self-pity,  and,  by  way 
of  spiting  his  fellows,  held  in  1775  a  separate  exhibition  consisting 
of  from  sixty  to  seventy  of  his  paintings.    Had  he  not  married  in 
early  life  a  lady  of  some  property,  Nathaniel  Hone  (b.  1730,  d.  1784) 
might  have  followed  in  the  steps  of  Peter  Toms.     Neither  of 
these  portrait-painters  can  be  looked  upon  as  a  man  of  genius  ;  but 
one  feels  strongly  tempted  to  assign  this  title  to  Francis  Cotes  (b.  172b, 
d  1770),  another  Foundation  Member,  and  a  pastellist  and  painter 
of  high  rank.    He  is  little  known  to-day,  for  his  work  is  partly 
hidden  in  old  country  houses,  and  partly  swallowed  up  in  the  auction 
histories  of  Reynolds  and  Gainsborough,  between  whom  Francis 
Cotes  may  be  fitly  placed  as  a  sort  of  connecting-link.    T^e  portrai 
of  Mrs.  Brocas,  by  which  Cotes  is  represented  in  the  National 


P  IV 


WILLIAM  HAMILTON,  R.A.    a751-1801.)   ELECTED  1789. 


MUSIDORA. 


From  the  Water-Colour  lent  by  Messrs.  Ernest  Brown  and  Phillips. 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
Gallery,  is  not  one  of  his  best  works  ;  still,  it  is  assuredly  good, 
having  distinction  both  in  colour  and  also  as  a  piece  of  delicate  and 
light-handed  craftsmanship.  In  looking  at  this  portrait,  a.  critic 
may  easily  guess  that  Cotes  formed  his  schemes  ot  colour  in  oil- 
painting  after  working  in  pastels.  He  has  a  number  of  delicate  and 
subtle  greys  that  belong  to  crayon  work  ;  and  amongst  them  is  a 
distinctive  grey  in  the  flesh-tones,  a  grey,  namely,  in  which  there  is 
a  slight  tinge  of  black,  of  lamp  black  or  bone  black.  It  is  rather 
dead  this  grey,  not  silvery  and  "  singing  "like  the  greys  of  Reynolds  ; 
but  students  would  do  well  to  remember  the  tone  as  eminently 
characteristic  of  Francis  Cotes. 

Gainsborough,  too,  after  the  period  spent  at  Bath,  became  fond  of  a 
grey  very  similar  to  that  which  Cotes  used  so  well.    But  it  had  a 
different  effect  in  Gainsborough's  work  ;  for  Gainsborough  used 
turpentine  in  preference  to  oil  as  a  medium,  so  that  he  might  get  a 
sort  of  running  or  fluid  quality  in  his  brushwork.    If  the  expres- 
sion may  be  used,  Gainsborough  became  a  water-colour  painter  in 
oil-colours,  as  he  liked  to  obtain  the  liquid  qualities  of  technique 
peculiar  to  water-colour.    It  is  not  at  all  necessary  to  speak  here  of 
Gainsborough's  female  portraits  ;  they  have  taken  their  place  for  all 
time  among  the  masterpieces  of  the  British  school.    Even  when  they 
are  faulty  in  drawing,  as  happens  again  and  again,  they  have  yet 
a  delicious  witchery  that  stamps  them  as  works  of  undeniable 
genius.    As  to  the  portraits  of  men,  they  arc  always  elegant  as 
well  as  manly,  and  what  could  be  more  subtle  in  its  appeal  to 
British  patriotism  than  the  superb  character-study  of  General  Wolfe 
now  in  the  collection  of  Mr.  Arthur  Sanderson  in  Edinburgh  ? 
Everybody  has  read  of  Wolfe  and  many  have  seen  that  preposterous 
likeness  of  him  by  Schack  in  the  National  Portrait  Gallery.  One 
has  to  own,  of  course,  that  Wolfe,  with  his  slanting  forehead  and 
receding  chin,  his  upturned  nose,  fiery  red  hair,  narrow  shoulders, 
and  attenuated  legs,  was  not  such  a  man  as  any  ordinary  artist  would 
wish  to  paint.    But  Gainsborough,  being  himself  a  poet-painter  of 
genius,  understood  the  boy  general  intuitively,  and  caught  the  dual 
character  that  placed  Wolfe  in  the  first  rank  of  British  soldiers 
and  also  among  the  most  enthusiastic  admirers  of  English  poetry. 
Almost  all  the  figure-painters  ot  the  Academy  turned  out  portraits 
from  time  to  time,  and  it  would  serve  no  useful  purpose  to  write 
down  a  long  list  of  their  names.    But  an  attempt  to  pick  out  a  name 
or  two  here  and  there  may  be  useful  to  the  student,  as  it  will  remind 
him  of  the  course  which  the  main  line  of  portraiture  has  taken 
through  the  history  of  the  Royal  Academy.    First,  then,  it  is 

p  v 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
necessary  to  return  to  the  Foundation  Members,  in  order  that  we  may 
take  a  look  at  Sir  Nathaniel  Dance  (b.  1734,  d.  181 1),  and  Edward 
Penny  (b.  1714,  d.  1791).    In  his  best  portraits,  like  the  historic 
one  of  Lord  Clive,  Dance  proved  himself  an  unobtrusive  painter 
with  a  good  and  manly  appreciation  of  the  character  of  his  sitters. 
But  for  his  marriage  with  Mrs.  Dummer,  a  very  wealthy  widow,  who 
brought  with  her  an  income  of    18,000  a  year,  it  is  quite  possible 
that  Dance  would  have  won  for  himself  a  place  among  the  foremost 
of  our  English  portrait-painters  ;  but  his  acquired  riches  caused  him 
to  leave  the  Academy  and  to  start  a  new  career  as  a  Member  of 
Parliament,  adding  the  name  of  Holland  to  his  own.    He  was  made 
a  Baronet  in  1 800.     In  his  leisure  moments  he  painted  landscapes 
which  to-day  are  quite  forgotten,  whereas  a  few  among  his  early 
portraits  have  been  mistaken  for  works  by  Reynolds.     This  has 
happened  also  to  Edward  Penny,  who  studied  under  Hudson,  the 
master  of  Reynolds,  and  whose  small  portraits  in  oil-colour,  often 
oval  in  shape,  had  a  real  vogue.    Many  of  them  have  certainly  some 
rich  and  pearly  notes  of  colour  that  give  him  a  rank  of  some 
importance  in  Sir  Joshua's  school  ;  but  his  touch  is  heavier  than  that 
of  Reynolds,  and  Penny's -tendency  was  to  allow  his  portraits  to  look 
too  small-bodied,  that  is  to  say,  the  heads  seem  too  large  and  the 
bodies  too  small.    Besides  his  portraiture.  Penny  gave  some  attention 
to  sentimental  subjects  and  even  to  historic  pieces  ;  but  the  chief 
work  he  did  for  the  arts  of  his  time  was  found  in  his  portraits  and 
in  the  lectures  which  he  delivered  before  the  students  of  the  Royal 
Academy.    The  lectures  were  given  between  the  years  1768  and 
1782,  during  which  time  he  was  the  first  professor  of  painting, 
preceding  in  that  capacity  James  Barry,  Henry  Fuscli,  John  Opic, 
Henry  Tresham,  Thomas  Phillips,  Henry  Howard,  C.  R.  Leslie, 
Solomon  Alex.  Hart,  Sir  William  Blake  Richmond,  etc. 
J.  F.  Rigaud,  R.A.,  who  translated  Leonardo  da  Vinci's  "  Treatise 
on  Painting,"  turned  out  some  portraits  that  deserve  attention,  though 
lie  himself  would  have  chosen  those  subject-pictures  that  won  so 
many  honours  from  abroad,  as  from  the  Academy  of  Bologna,  the 
Royal  Academy  of  Stockholm,  and  also  from  Gustavus  IV.  of  Sweden. 
Rigaud  became  a  full  member  of  the  Academy  in  1784,  his  election 
being  three  years  earlier  than  those  of  John  Opie  and  James  Northcote, 
and  four  years  earlier  than  that  of  John  Russell.    These  three  artists 
deserve  to  be  mentioned  here,  although  Northcote's  fame  to-day  is 
determined  by  his  delightful  conversations  with  Hazlitt  and  James 
Ward  rather  than  by  his  art.    John  Russell,  whose  treatise  on  the 
"  Elements  of  Painting  in  Crayons  "  should  be  known  to  students, 
p  vi 


^^r^4■«^c  iir»r1^»r  FranriR  Cntes.  and  eaualled 

•J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  R.  A.  q£ 

/ 


^.^^  ..^^i^   ^^^^^  /s^^^D 

^^y/^  ' 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
studied  pastels  under  Francis  Cotes,  and  equalled  his  master.  He 
was  a  dashing,  vigorous  fellow,  with  something  of  the  spirit  of  Franz 
Hals.    It  is  said  that  he  prepared  his  own  crayons  in  a  manner 
invented  by  himself,  and  the  surface  of  his  work  has  certainly  a 
painter-like  quality  which  the  brittle  pastels  of  to-day  would  not 
give  us.    Ozias  Humphry,  R.A.,  was  a  very  successful  miniature- 
painter  from  1764  to  1772.    In  the  latter  year  he  fell  from  his  horse 
and  received  a  shock  that  unfitted  him  for  the  execution  of  such 
delicate  work.    He  then  took  to  oil-painting,  and,  in  1773,  went  to 
study  in  Rome,  accompanied  by  his  friend  Romney.    During  his 
stay  there,  which  lasted  four  years,  he  regained  his  health  ;  and 
when,  after  some  years'  work  in  London,  he  went  to  India  in  1785, 
he  was  able  to  return  to  his  miniatures,  and  to  accumulate  quite  a 
large  fortune  in  the  courts  of  Lucknow,  Moorshedabad,  and  Benares. 
These  small  portraits,  though  good,  cannot  be  placed  on  a  level  with 
those  ofCosway  (b.  1740,  d.  1 821),  who  was  justly  the  most  fashionable 
miniature-painter  of  his  day.  But  we  must  now  pass  from  Humphry 
to  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence,  who  appeals  to  us  as  a  courtier  among 
portraitists — an  English  Van  Dyck,  let  us  say,  who  needed  and  missed, 
during  his  apprenticeship,  the  discipUne  and  teaching  of  an  English 
Rubens.    But,  in  spite  of  his  limitations,  Lawrence  is  a  favourite 
with  connoisseurs.    His  character  was  noble,  his  kindUness  of  heart 
sincere  and  deep  ;  and  his  portraits  contain  much  of  the  man's 
fine  nature.    Hoppner  and  Sir  William  Beechey  may  be  bracketed 
with  Lawrence,  for  the  three  of  them  became  full  members  between 
the  years  1794  and  1798.    Beechey's  reputation  has  suffered  much 
from  time,  whilst  that  of  Hoppner  shows  signs  of  settling  into 
permanence   among  the   leading  portrait-painters  of  the  second 
rank. 

As  to  George  Dawe,  who  became  an  Academician  in  18 14,  he  was 
a  portrait-painter  of  considerable  vigour,  and  it  is  worth  while  to 
recall  his  name,  as  he  was  the  first  Englishman  of  any  note  who 
carried  with  him  into  Russia  the  traditions  of  his  country's  art,  and 
made  them  famous  there.  Raeburn  comes  next  in  chronological 
order,  being  born  in  1756  and  elected  R.A.  in  1815.  For  some 
time  his  fame  was  under  a  cloud.  Critics  either  misunderstood  hmi, 
or  else  his  personal  equation  was  offensive  to  that  temper  of  senti- 
mental dilettantism  which,  during  the  last  quarter  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  enfeebled  the  whole  art  of  English  criticism.  To-day,  it  is 
pleasant  to  add.  Sir  Henry  Raeburn's  manly  genius  is  justly  valued 
in  the  best  quarters.  Certain  writers,  it  is  true,  pick  holes  in  his 
strong  handling  ;   but  they  are  those  whose  judgment  has  been 

p  vii 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
narrowed  by  partial  study  and  whose  influence  is  limited.  To  those 
who  do  not  spend  their  time  in  the  backwaters  of  art,  the  name  of 
Raeburn  is  rightly  looked  upon  as  a  great  one.  It  is  always  as  a 
painter  that  Raeburn  makes  his  appeal,  and  more  often  than  not  the 
character  of  his  work  shows  that,  in  his  genius,  the  masculine 
elements  over-ruled  the  feminine.  It  is  this  that  separates  him  from 
the  other  great  portraitists  of  the  early  English  school.  True  it  is, 
no  doubt,  that  Raeburn  painted  some  very  good  pictures  of  women  ; 
but  it  is  always  in  his  male  portraits  that  he  reaches  his  highest 
level  of  achievement.  A  Scotsman,  he  had  the  good  Scot's  eye  for 
colour  ;  and  his  technique,  his  manipulation  of  the  paint,  ought  to 
be  studied  to-day  by  all  youngsters  in  the  schools.  No  other  painter 
of  the  Royal  Academy  has  shown  so  much  regard  lor  the  decorative 
value  of  plain  spaces  of  simple  colour.  Examine  the  actual  work- 
manship of  his  coats,  and  you  will  find  usually  that  this  quality  of 
his  handling  connects  him  with  Mr,  Frank  Brangwyn,  A.R.A. 
Raeburn,  too,  like  every  original  colourist,  gives  us  peculiar  and 
fascinating  greys,  that  lie  between  and  unite  into  harmony  the  more 
positive  colours  that  lend  richness  to  the  general  impression. 
Many  other  Academicians  have  painted  good  portraits,  like  Sir 
Edwin  Landseer,  Sir  William  Allan,  and,  on  a  lower  level,  Sir 
Francis  Grant.  But  it  is  not  until  we  come  to  Millais  that  we 
meet  with  such  manifestations  of  genius  as  mark  a  new  development 
in  the  traditions  of  EngUsh  portrait-painting.  Millais  was  elected  a 
Royal  Academician  in  1863,  two  years  before  the  death  of  President 
Eastlake.  His  genius,  then,  just  comes  within  the  scope  of  the 
present  article.  A  well-known  French  critic,  M.  Georges  Lafenestre, 
when  speaking  of  the  English  portraits  at  the  great  Exhibition  of 
1889,  singled  out  the  work  of  Millais  for  special  reference,  and 
joined  it,  in  his  criticism,  to  the  portraits  by  Ouless,  Holl,  and 
Shannon.  He  admired  them  all,  and  then,  in  a  few  brief  sentences, 
showed  the  difference  between  the  modern  school  of  English 
portraiture  and  the  rival  French  school : 

"  Tandis  que  les  portraitistes  fran9ais  etablissent  la  dignite  de  leurs 
figures  et  ennoblissent  I'aspect  de  leurs  physionomies,  soit  par  la 
fermete  des  contours  et  du  modele,  soit  par  I'ampleur  et  la  puissance 
de  la  touche  coloree,  les  portraitistes  anglais  arrivent  a  I'expression 
de  la  grandeur  par  I'extraordinaire  justesse  des  details  multiplies. 
Cette  fa9on  de  comprendre  et  d'exprimer,  qui  est  celle  aussi  des 
romanciers  et  des  historiens,  anglais,  ne  saute  pas  d'abord  aux  yeux 
chez  MM.  Holl  et  Shannon,  plus  penetres  des  methods  continen- 
tales  ;  elle  est  flagrante  chez  MM.  Millais  et  Ouless,  dont  les  ceuvres 
p  viii 


< 
O 


PAINTERS  OF  THii  RUYAi.  AUAUJLMY,  1705-1000 

,1R  A.  \V.  CALLCOTT,  R.  A. 


^ 


'2< 


no  rccuru  ui    wiiai  niigciicct  jtvctuinnan  ougg\-StC 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
sont  typiques  et  de  premier  ordre.  Qu'on  compare  le  martelage 
pointille,  minutieux,  acharn6,  de  taches  innombrables,  au  moyen 
duquel  sont  construits  les  corps,  si  solides  pourtant,  et  les  visages,  si 
nobles  et  si  parlants,  de  M,  Gladstone  et  du  Cardinal  Manning,  avec 
la  simplification  rapide  de  touches  fermes  et  hardies  par  lesquelles 
MM.  Bonnat  ou  Carolus  Duran  representent  un  personnage  inter- 
essant,  on  comprendra,  du  coup,  la  difference  entre  les  deux  ecoles. 
II  y  a  plus  de  saveur  pittoresque  chez  nos  peintres,  il  y  a  peut-etre 
plus  de  saveur  intellectuelle  chez  les  peintres  anglais,  au  moins  chez 
ceux-la,  car  lorsque  le  systeme  n'est  pas  applique  par  des  artistes  de 
cette  force,  il  n'aboutit  qu  a  des  enluminures  froides  et  mcsquincs, 
d'un  aspect  sec  ct  jaunatre,  assez  penibles  a  regarder." 
M.  Lafenestre  speaks  truly,  and  his  criticism  has  a  twofold  interest. 
Not  only  does  it  mark  the  difference  between  the  modern  schools  of 
portraiture  in  France  and  England  :  it  reminds  us  also  of  the  points 
that  distinguish  the  modern  English  methods  from  those  of  Reynolds, 
Raeburn,  Romney,  Lawrence,  and  their  contemporaries.  It  is  true 
that  the  influence  of  Mr.  Sargent  is  to-day  at  variance  with  the 
principles  that  Millais  upheld  and  exemplified :  and  thus  we  arc  in 
the  midst  of  yet  another  transformation  of  English  portraiture. 
Classic  and  Historical  Subject-Pictures.— Thtvt  is  pathos  in  the 
Academy's  persevering  and  fruitless  efforts  to  establish  in  England 
a  generative  set  of  traditions  in  these  great  branches  of  art.  From 
the  beginning  it  has  spared  no  pains  in  its  endeavours  to  raise  up 
a  school  of  figure-painting,  having  less  homely  and  fireside  aims 
than  those  which  have  been  fostered  by  the  nation's  delight  in 
small  pictures  of  famiHar  genre.  In  its  schools  the  Royal 
Academy  has  struggled  hard  to  give  importance  to  classic  and 
historical  subjects :  and  it  has  spent  much  money  in  sending 
its  Gold  MedaUists  to  Italy,  and  to  other  countries,  there  to 
search  for  the  "  great  style."  One  remembers,  too,  many  another 
mark  of  the  unflagging  enthusiasm  which  has  ever  distinguished  the 
Academicians  in  their  attitude  to  the  higher  achievements  of  design 
in  figure-painting.  Thus,  in  1773,  the  members  or  the  Royal 
Academy  offered  to  paint  at  their  own  expense  a  set  of  Biblical 
histories  for  the  decoration  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  The  artists 
chosen  to  do  the  work  were  Reynolds,  Cipriani,  James  Barry, 
Benjamin  West,  Nathaniel  Dance,  and  Angelica  Kauffman.  Reynolds 
wished  to  paint  the  Virgin  with  Christ  in  the  Manger;  James 
Barry,  Christ  Rejected  by  the  Jews,  before  Pilate  ;  Dance,  the  Raising 
of  Lazarus ;  and  West,  Christ  Raising  the  Widow's  Son.  There  is 
no  record  of  what  AngeHca  Kauffman  suggested  for  her  subject. 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
and  certainly  one  would  never  think  of  associating  Angelica's 
pretty  romance  of  style  with  the  superb  dignity  and  strength  oi 
Wren's  cathedral.  In  any  case,  the  King  was  friendly  to  the 
Academy's  proposals,  and  it  was  thought  that  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  would  follow  the  King  without  the  least  hesitation.  The 
Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  Dr.  Newton,  was  well  pleased  with  the  generous 
offer  ;  but  the  trustees  of  the  Cathedral,  the  Bishop  of  London  and 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  opposed  it,  believing  that  the 
introduction  of  pictures  into  St.  Paul's  would  stir  up  a  great  deal  of 
noise  and  be  looked  upon  as  a  harking  back  to  the  old  beliefs  of 
Popery.  This  put  an  end  to  the  whole  project.  Shortly  afterwards, 
\^  ^774-^  the  Society  of  Arts  and  Manufactures,  recently  established 
in  the  Adelphi,  invited  the  members  of  the  Royal  Academy  to  paint 
for  their  great  hall  a  number  of  pictures,  eight  dealing  with  English 
history,  and  two  emblematical  designs  relating  to  the  aims  of  the 
Society.  Reynolds,  Dance,  Mortimer,  West,  Cipriani,  Wright, 
Penny,  and  Angehca  Kauffman,  were  mentioned  as  the  artists  who 
would  do  full  justice  to  the  subjects.  But  the  Academy,  chilled  by  the 
snub  just  received  from  the  trustees  of  St.  Paul's,  declined  to  accede 
to  the  wishes  of  the  Society  of  Arts.  For  all  that,  the  scheme  did 
not  fall  to  the  ground  without  some  good  arising  from  it.  James 
Barry,  a  hot-temperedenthusiast,and  a  man  of  headlong  determination, 
proposed  to  the  Society  of  Arts,  in  1777,  that  he  should  undertake  alone 
a  set  of  paintings  on  "  Human  Culture  " — a  piece  of  work  that  kept 
him  busy  for  nearly  seven  years.  The  remuneration  he  received  was 
derived  from  two  exhibitions  of  his  pictures,  that  brought  him 
^^503;  a  small  sum,  but  the  Society  added  to  it  a  vote  of  two 
hundred  and  fifty  guineas  and  their  gold  medal.  Alas  for  James 
Barry,  he  had  won  fame,  no  doubt  ;  but  his  success  turned  his  head, 
and  he  began  to  tyrannise  over  his  brother  Academicians.  It  got 
into  his  Irish  mind  as  a  fixed  idea,  that  the  surplus  funds  of  the 
Academy  ought  to  be  spent  on  the  formation  of  a  gallery  of  old 
masters  for  his  pupils  in  the  painting  school  to  study  ;  and  although 
this  wish  of  his  was  in  flat  hostiUty  with  the  Instrument  ot 
Institution,  Barry  clung  to  it  in  a  passionate  manner  and  satirised 
every  Academician  who  ran  counter  to  him.  Yet  he  was  not 
altogether  a  fool.  There  was  a  touch  in  him  of  wild  Irish  humour. 
Thus,  when  thieves  broke  into  his  house  and  left  him  poorer  by 
£^00,  he  put  up  a  paper  to  announce  that  the  burglary  was 
committed  by  the  thirty-nine  Academicians  who  opposed  him.  He 
even  made  fun  of  his  colleagues  before  the  students,  a  quite 
unpardonable  offence  ;  till  at  last  he  made  himself  so  troublesome  that 

P  X 


S. — JAMES  WARD,  R.  A. 


^.*=^^^**-  c<^::^^^^ 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
a  General  Assembly  of  his  fellows,  with  the  full  approval  of  the 
King,  struck  his  name  off  the  roll  and  expelled  him. 
One  might  give  many  other  examples  of  the  efforts  made,  in  official 
quarters,  to  infuse  life  into  a  national  school  of  historical  figure- 
painting.  You  will  think,  no  doubt,  of  Alderman  Boydell  and  his 
Shakespeare  Gallery  ;  but  what,  after  all,  has  been  the  net  artistic 
result  of  all  the  striving  ?  How  many  large  pictures  of  a  classic  type, 
or  paintings  based  on  history,  retain  their  first  freshness  ?  Are 
there  a  score  which  have  a  perennial  charm — an  inspiration  and  a 
style  which  Time  transmits,  always  as  a  new  heritage,  from  one 
generation  to  another  ?    One  does  not  care  even  to  name  those 

O  •111 

Academicians  who,  during  the  life  of  their  institution,  have  devoted 
so  much  patience  and  infinite  care  and  industry  to  the  production  ot 
huge  compositions.  They  have  been  leaders  of  a  forlorn  hope,  all 
fired  with  a  noble  spirit,  and  it  is  not  their  fault  that  they  did  so 
little  good  by  toiling  in  opposition  to  the  spirit  of  their  time  and  the 
needs  of  their  countrymen.  From  West  to  Howard,  from  Howard 
to  S.  A.  Hart,  and  from  Hart  to  the  present  day,  our  English 
historical  painters  have  enjoyed  short-lived  periods  of  fame.  Their 
works  survive  chiefly  as  fragments  of  art-history  ;  and  their  reputations 
recede  from  us. 

Genre  Painting. — It  is  in  the  various  forms  or  genre  that  the  Royal 
Academicians  have  produced  such  things  in  figure-painting  as  arc 
vital,  various,  and  full  of  the  impulses  and  eccentricities  of  the 
English  character.  Criticism  may  scoff  at  many  of  the  English 
genre  painters,  and  assure  us  that  such  old  Academicians  as  Wheatley 
and  Hamilton,  Mulrcady,  MacHse,  Webster,  Frith,  and  E.  M.  Ward 
have  long  had  their  day, being  as  nothing  to  anyone  who  believes  in  the 
newer  theories  and  methods  of  artistic  practice.  Criticism  may  say 
all  this  and  more,  but  the  English  nation  will  form  its  own  opinion, 
and  will  remain  true  to  itself  and  its  offspring.  We  may  be  perfectly 
sure  that  Webster's  playful  homeliness  is  as  national  to-day  as  it  ever 
was  ;  we  may  be  certain,  too,  that  Frith  and  E.  M.  Ward  did  not 
waste  their  time  when  they  gave  such  infinite  and  loving  care  to 
every  detail  in  their  painted  stories.  Even  it  the  public  should 
weary  of  their  technical  peculiarities,  many  of  their  pictures  will  yet 
live  on  as  relics  of  the  social  life  of  their  time,  and  be  very  useful  to 
students  of  social  history. 

George  Dawe,  R.A.,  in  his  "  Life  of  Morland,"  speaks  in  a 
patronising  way  of  his  friend's  rustic  art,  and  regrets  that  Morland's 
mind,  unlike  his  own,  did  not  occupy  itself  with  nobler  ambitions.  Well, 
Morland's  art  is  still  alive,  whilst  Dawe's  high  ambitions  in  figure- 

p  xi 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
painting  have  passed  into  the  limbo  of  forgotten  things.  It  is  useful 
that  facts  of  this  kind  should  be  remembered  here ;  for  the  criticism  of 
to-day  has  no  sympathy  at  all  with  even  the  fine-tempered  genre  of 
C.  R.  Leslie,  who  had  a  rare  gift  of  subtle  humour,  and  a  charming 
€ase  of  power  in  the  distribution  of  his  figures.  As  to  Sir  David 
Wilkie,  the  people  love  him  still,  and  all  good  painters  dehght  in  his 
inimitable  personality;  but  Wilkie  himself  grew  tired  of  the  spirited 
pictures  that  he  painted  as  a  bird  sings,  and,  changing  his  style,  turned 
out  such  large  and  ambitious  half-failures  as  John  Knox  Preaching 
the  Reformation  at  St,  Andrews,  He  should  have  remained  faithful  to 
his  first  manner,  in  which  he  won  lasting  fame  as  the  Robert  Burns 
of  English  art. 

Another  Scot  of  true  genius,  John  Phillip,  R.A.,  a  man  who  suffered 
much  from  ill-health  and  depression,  may  be  mentioned  here  as  the 
antithesis  of  Wilkie.  He  painted  by  fits  and  starts,  but  when  the 
working  impulse  came  to  him,  he  brushed  off  a  picture  with 
extraordinary  swiftness,  his  first  efforts  being  clever  scenes  from 
Scottish  life.  In  1851,  owing  to  a  breakdown  of  health,  he  went  to 
Spain,  where  he  continued  to  live,  paying  visits  once  a  year  to 
London  and  Aberdeen.  The  Spanish  sun  was  not  long  in  finding  a 
home  in  his  colour,  and  the  pictures  he  did  in  Spain  have  a  virile 
and  masterly  technique,  that  bears  some  kinship  with  the  spirit  of 
Velasquez.  Phillip,  indeed,  became  a  great  colourist,  a  master 
painter.  He  stands  apart  from  the  followers  of  the  literary  and 
narrative  genre  that  belongs  to  the  home-bred  English  school. 
Phillip's  greatness  has  yet  to  be  appreciated  at  its  real  value  :  his  day 
is  coming,  but  not  yet  come.  He  died  in  1867,  at  the  age  of  fifty, 
three  years  after  Millais  was  received  by  him  and  others  as  a  full 
member  of  the  Royal  Academy. 

Many  are  inclined  to  regard  Millais  as  a  painter  of  history,  yet  his 
real  strength  was  shown  throughout  his  career  in  subjects  that  come 
within  the  range  of  genre  painting.  His  most  direct  and  persuasive 
appeal  is  that  in  which  he  shows  his  heart,  and  proves  himself  to  be 
a  humanist,  a  humanist  more  manly  than  any  other  painter  of  the 
English  school.  He  has  a  love  of  childhood,  a  delight  in  womanhood, 
not  less  beautiful  than  Sir  Joshua's  ;  but  it  differs  from  the  earlier 
master's,  being  often  charged  with  a  certain  wistfulness,  that  came  to 
him,  as  it  came  to  Dickens,  out  of  the  spirit  of  his  over-anxious  time. 
When  viewed  from  a  technical  standpoint,  Millais  is  often  dry  in 
touch,  sometimes  even  brittle,  and,  again  and  again,  the  inspiration 
in  his  work  seems  to  break  off,  to  leave  him  suddenly,  as  though  he 
were  overcome  by  a  spasm  of  self-distrust,  or  a  fatigue  that  he  could 
p  xii 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
not  master.    But  if  Millais  has  limitations,  he  is  none  the  less  ai 
genuine  master  and  a  true  man  in  all  his  achievements. 
Painters  of  the  Sea  and  the  Sea  Coast. — There  are  but  few  painters  of" 
the  sea  in  the  history  of  the  first  ninety-seven  years  of  the  Academy. 
Brett,  who  has  been  described  as  the  painter  of  Britannia's  realm 
and  of  searching,  blinding  sunlight,  did  not  enter  the  Academy 
until  1 88 1.    E.  W.  Cooke,  a  marine  painter  of  some  distinction,, 
comes  within  our  period,  the  date  of  his  election  as  R.A.  being 
1863.    He  died  in  1880  ;  and  one  fears  that  his  numerous  pictures 
do  not  keep  his  reputation  from  waning.    An  artist  of  vastly  greater 
power,  freshness,  and  charm,  is  J.  C.  Hook,  who,  happily,  at 
the  age  of  eighty-four,  is  still  busily  at  work.    It  has  been  his 
fortunate  lot  to  bring  home  to  us,  in  our  city  life,  the  perfume  of  the- 
sea  and  the  invigorating  toil  of  the  fisherfolk.    He  is  a  true  sailor  at 
heart,  a  fragrant  colourist,  a  cheery  and  resourceful  painter.    And  as 
a  pastoral  artist,  he  has  taken  us  many  times  into  the  Surrey  lanes, 
and  fields  ;  but  his  chief  claim  to  our  constant  admiration  rests  on 
his  gallant  sea-pictures.    When  one  thinks  of  him,  and  then  calls  up 
to  memory  the  work  of  Dominic  Serres,  a  Foundation  Member  of 
the  Royal  Academy,  one  cannot  but  marvel  at  the  immense  progress, 
which  has  been  made  in  the  treatment  of  the  sea  by  British  painters. 
Serres,  though  a  Gascon  by  birth,  was  truly  English  in  feeling,  and 
took  much  pleasure  in  commemorating  the  victories  won  by  Lord 
Hawke  and  other  naval  officers.    Dominic  Serres  had  a  wide  fame 
in  his  day,  but  to  us  his  pictures  are  inferior  to  the  naval  and 
military   scenes   brushed   with   so   much   vigour   by  P.  J.  De 
Loutherbourg,  R.A.,  a  man  of  many  gifts,  who  had  not  a  little 
influence  over  the  early  work  of  J.  M.  W.  Turner.    Indeed,  Turner's 
Death  of  Nelson,  now  in  the  National  Gallery,  and  his  Battle  of^ 
Trafalgar  in  Greenwich  Hospital,  were  painted  in  rivalry  with  De 
Loutherbourg,  and  won  a  complete  victory  all  along  the  line.  That 
Turner  still  remains  the  greatest  of  all  sea-painters,  is  a  truth  that 
few  judges  venture  to  dispute.    Much  later  men,  like  Henry  Moore,, 
have  equalled  him  in  their  interpretations  of  certain  aspects  of  light 
and  movement ;  but  Turner's  knowledge  of  the  sea,  and  of  moving 
waters  generally,  remains  unexampled  in  its  range  and  accuracy.. 
One  reason  of  this  is  that  he,  as  a  young  man,  gave  profound  study 
to  the  whole  drama  of  the  sea's  life,  taking  it,  as  it  were,  scene  by 
scene,  and  concentrating  his  whole  attention  in  the  effort  to  make 
real  one  given  effect.    In  the  Shipwreck,  for  instance,  his  intention 
is  to  represent  the  irresistible  weight  and  terrifying  power  of  storm- 
beaten  water.    The  boats  are  introduced,  partly  as  elements  of 

p  xiii 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

design,  and  partly  to  contrast  their  fragility  with  the  sea's  strength. 
He  forgets  that  everybody  in  the  boats  would  be  drenched  with 
spray,  if  not  with  water  ;  and  the  sails,  too,  are  perfectly  dry.  But 
such  details  did  not  trouble  him  so  long  as  his  main  purpose  was 
achieved.  After  the  infinite  variousness  of  Turner's  art,  it  is  rather 
risky  to  mention  the  other  Academicians  who  have  refreshed  us  with 
their  own  delight  in  the  salt  air  and  the  colour  ot  sea-water.  There 
are  William  Collins,  R.A.,  1820  ;  Sir  A.  W.  Callcott,  R.A.,  1810; 
Clarkson  Stanfield,  R.A.,  1835  ;  and  J.  J.  Chalon,  R.A.,  1841. 
Animal  and  Sporting  Pictures. — What  can  be  said  of  George  Stubbs, 
who  became  an  Associate  of  the  Academy  in  1780  ?  He  may  be 
described  as  the  Sturgcss  of  his  time  ;  for  his  undoubted  talent  never 
reached  its  full  maturity.  He  had  his  living  to  earn,  and,  being 
thus  dependent  on  a  limited  purchasing  public,  he  was  forced  by 
circumstances  to  pass  the  greater  part  of  his  time  in  doing  portraits 
of  racehorses.  In  a  water-colour  by  Turner  in  the  Wallace  Collec- 
tion, entitled  Grouse  Shooting,  with  Portrait  of  the  Artist,  the  dogs  are  by 
Stubbs,  and  their  treatment  is  quite  in  keeping  with  Turner's  tech- 
nique. Stubbs  shows  much  observation,  as  one  would  expect  from 
a  man  who  devoted  not  a  little  of  his  spare  time  to  the  preparation 
of  technical  books  dealing  with  his  special  branch  of  art.  Stubbs,  in 
1766,  completed  a  book  on  "  The  Anatomy  of  the  Horse,"  illustrated 
with  plates  etched  by  himself  after  his  own  drawings.  Not  long 
before  his  death,  which  took  place  in  1806,  he  issued  three  numbers 
of  another  work,  under  the  quaint  title  :  "  A  Comparative  Anatomical 
Exposition  of  the  Structure  of  the  Human  Body  with  that  of  a  Tiger 
and  a  Common  Fowl." 

The  art  of  Sawrey  Gilpin,  R.A.,  1797,  has  much  in  character  with 
that  of  Stubbs,  inasmuch  as  it  represents  a  good  many  racehorses  ; 
but,  taking  it  as  a  whole,  it  has  stronger  qualities,  despite  such  defects 
as  the  insipidity  which  often  gives  weakness  to  the  colour.  A  man  ot 
spirit  himself,  he  was  greatly  interested  in  the  habits  of  wild  animals, 
and  proved  in  several  pictures  that  he  had  a  painter-like  knowledge 
of  tigers.  Among  the  Diploma  paintings  of  the  Royal  Academy, 
Gilpin  is  represented  by  a  picture  of  Horses  in  a  Storm.  It  is  spirited 
in  composition,  and  fairly  interesting  in  technique  ;  but  for  dash  and 
diablerie  it  cannot  be  compared  with  Philip  Reinagle's  Eagle  and 
Vulture  Disputing  with  a  Hycena,  which  recalls  to  mind  a  rather 
similar  work  painted  by  Verlat,  a  modern  Belgian  artist  who  died 
some  years  ago.  Philip  Reinagle's  son,  Richard  Ramsay,  born  in 
1775,  and  elected  R.A.  in  1823,  is  another  animal  painter  to  whom 
students  may  be  referred.  He  was  expelled  from  the  Academy  in 
p  xiv 


 x/vyv/- 

1848,  having  exhibited  as  his  own  work  a  pi< 

-SIR  MARTIN  A.  SIIEE,  P.  R.  A. 


^^^^ 


saic 
an: 
I  sc 
sts 
tri 
an 
nd 
>n  ; 
an( 
•roi 
ef 
e  b 
wh 

:ts  ( 
ibei 
lov 
i^hc 


A.irs  1         ur   iJnjL  kuial,  i\^n.ur.Lvii ,  1 700-1000 
contrast  their  fraeilitv  with  the  sea's  strength. 
;ryt 
atei 
tro 
i  in 


^ ^^^^^^^  


848,  having  exhibited  as  his  own  work 


^Xi"<(  X  XjXVO    WX-     X  XXXl^  1.  jr^^jryxj  ±l,lvx  i  ^    a  /  v^u— a  <j>-hj 

)  contrast  their  fraffilitv  with  the  sea's  strength, 
eryl 
^atei 
tro 
e  in 
s  ot 
ith 

,  R. 
R.A 

Pic. 

soci 

rgcs 

urit 

a  li 

5S  tl: 

L  wa 

S/ioi 

eatn 

ws  : 

not 

eali: 

look 

by 

lich 

lert 

ruci 

1." 

IJilf 

nuc 

hok 

ich  ( 

s  gi 

l1  pi 

:he 

lb) 

fair 

be 

vit/i 

d  b 

hili 

.A. 

;rre 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
1848,  having  exhibited  as  his  ov^^n  work  a  picture  by  a  young  man 
named  Yarnold  which  he  had  purchased  at  a  broker's  shop.  As  for 
Abraham  Cooper,  R.A.,  1 820,  he  was  at  his  best  in  his  least  ambitious 
efforts,  many  of  his  simple  sketches  being  admirable  from  all  points 
of  view.  It  was  in  1867  that  his  namesake,  Thomas  Sidney  Cooper, 
began  his  long  reign  as  an  Academician,  rising,  now  and  then, 
to  the  level  of  Adrian  van  de  Velde,  then  sinking  to  the 
elaborately  groomed  style  of  Eugene  Verboeckhoeven.  But  T.  S. 
Cooper  was  happy  in  some  of  his  early  water-colours,  and  his  pencil 
sketches  should  be  as  useful  to  landscape  painters  as  the  etchings  by 
Robert  Hills  have  been  for  many  years.  Notwithstanding  this,  it  is 
a  joy  to  switch  off  one's  thoughts  to  the  greatness  of  James  Ward, 
R.A.,  and  of  Edwin  Landseer,  R.A.  These  men  have  little  in 
common.  Ward  being  a  true  descendant  of  Rubens,  while  Landseer 
is  an  English  moralist  and  story-teller — a  sort  of  JEsop,  whose  animals 
speak  and  divert  us  with  homilies.  Landseer,  too,  though  a 
profound  student  and  a  wonderful  draughtsman,  was  not  a  great 
painter,  being  seldom  a  fine  colourist  or  a  master  of  constructive 
brushwork.  He  has  left  us  no  painter's  masterpiece  equal  and 
similar  to  that  study  of  Pigs  Sleeping  in  the  Sunlight  by  which  Ward 
is  represented  at  South  Kensington.  This  is  an  amazing  little  piece 
of  nature,  hanging  by  the  side  of  the  large  picture  oi  Bulls  Fighting, 
in  which  James  Ward  makes  known  his  direct  descent  from  the 
great  Flemish  master. 

Landscape-Painters. — Although  it  cannot  be  said  that  the  Royal 
Academy  has  done  honour  to  itself  by  including  amongst  its  members 
all  the  leading  landscape-painters  of  the  English  school,  it  is  none  the 
less  true  that  its  landscape  history  has  interests  of  a  surprisingly 
diverse  kind.  The  mind  is  bewildered  when  it  tries  to  summon  up 
into  critical  focus  the  many  and  various  aims  and  styles  ;  ranging 
from  the  laboured  semi-classicism  of  Barret  and  Zuccarelli  to  the 
austere  and  penetrating  genius  of  Richard  Wilson  ;  or,  again,  passing 
from  the  serene  water-colours  of  Sandby,  Pars,  and  Edridge,  to  the 
path-finding  patience  and  intuition  of  Gainsborough,  of  Turner,  of 
Constable.  These  names  have  in  themselves  the  force,  the  meaning 
of  histories ;  to  mention  them  is  to  speak  in  one  breath  a  completed 
book  :  just  as  the  word  Alps  is,  in  brief,  the  whole  topography  ot 
Switzerland,  so  the  names  of  Turner,  Gainsborough,  Constable,  Wilson, 
Cotnian,  sum  up  immediately  the  greatest  results  of  past  landscape- 
painting  in  England.  But  there  are  other  members  of  the  Academy 
whose  claim  to  our  respect  must  not  be  overshadowed  by  the  fame  of 
their  betters.    WilHam  Daniell,  for  instance,  whose  work  ought  to 

P  XV 


PAINTERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
have  been  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  sea-coast,  left  behind  him 
a  good  many  landscapes  which  have  a  quite  disconcerting  resemblance 
to  those  of  Turner's  dark  period.  Indeed,  his  picture  in  the  Diploma 
Gallery,  an  impressive  view  on  the  coast  of  Scotland,  has  finer  qualities 
of  a  Turneresque  kind  than  Turner's  own  Dolbadarn  Castle  that  hangs 
opposite  to  it.  Many  an  expert,  if  left  to  his  own  judgment,  would 
attribute  Daniell's  picture  to  the  greater  man.  Then  we  have 
Thomas  Daniell,  R.A.,  1799,  whose  Indian  scenes  have  real  historic 
value  ;  nor  should  some  tribute  of  hearty  praise  be  withheld  from 
the  breeziness  of  J.  J.  Chalon,  the  persuasive  sincerity  of  F.  R.  Lee, 
and  the  patient  thoroughness  of  David  Roberts.  And  there  are 
other  men,  gentle  painters  like  Thomas  Creswick,  or  W.  F.  Wither- 
ington,  whose  talents  are  not  great,  but  whose  quiet  silvern  modesty 
has  much  of  that  charm  which  rings  out  with  such  a  glad  freshness 
in  the  Robin  Hood  ballads  : 

In  somer  when  the  shawes  be  sheyne 

And  leves  be  large  and  longe 
Hit  is  full  merry  in  fair  foreste 

To  here  the  foulys  song. 

To  see  the  dere  draw  to  the  dale 

And  leve  the  hilles  hee, 
And  shadow  hem  in  the  leves  grene 

Under  the  grene  wode  tre. 

W.  S.  Sparrow. 


p  xvi 


P  1.  SIR  JOSHUA  REYNOLDS  (1723-179:),  First  President  ot  the  R.A. 


P  3.  FRANCIS  COTES  (1725-1770i,  Foundation  Member 


POPwTKArr    OF  MRS.  BROCAS 


Id  the  National  Gallery 


P  3.  BENJAMIN  WEST  1733-I3a0\  Foundation  Member,  P.R.A..  1792-1830) 


BELINDA'S  TOILET;  POPE'S  RAPE  OF  THE  LOCK 


From  the  Drawing  in  the  British  Museum 


P  B.  MICHAEL  ANGELO  RGOKER  (1743-1801,1,  Elected  A.R.A.  1770 


VIEW  OF  DEDHAM 


In  the  National  Gallery 


P  10.  JOHANN  ZOFFANY  (1733-lSlO),  Bleated  R.A.  1769 


PORTRAIT  OF  GAINSBOROUGH 


In  the  ivational  Galler 


P  11.  RICHARD  COSWAY  il7±0-132h,  Electei  R.A.  1771 


PORTRAIT  OP  MRS.  PLOODEN 


From  the  Drawing  in  the  British  Museum 


03  QJ 


O  2 
o  5 


SIR  EDWIN  HENRY  LANDSEER,  R.A.   (1302-1373.)   ELECTED  1331. 


LOW  LIFE. 


From  the  Painting  m  the  Collection  of  James  Orrock,  Esq..  R.I. 


P  21.  THOMAS  STOTHARD,  R.A. 


RUTH 


Trom  an  EiigTaviiiR-  by  James  Heath,  A. R.A.    iPrint  lent  by  Messrs.  J  Rimell  &  Sons; 


P  24.  SAWREY  GILPIl^  1 1723-1307),  Elected  R.A.  1797. 


P  31.  J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  R.A. 


ON  THE  SEINE 


In  the  National  Gallery 


P  33.  J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  H.A. 


Tlit;  MED  WAY 


ill  the  National  Gallery 


P  33.  SIR  HENRY  KAEBURN  fl756-1323),  Elected  R.A.  iSlo 


PORTRAIT  OF  A  LADY 


In  Lhe  National  Galleiy.    Photogirph  hy  the  Autotype  Co. 


P  3J.  GEORGE  DAWE  aTii-l^"-^",  Elected  R.A.  1814 


PORTKAIT  GFIFKIKCESS  CHARLOTTE  OE  WALES 


In  the  Kational  rortrait  Gallery.  Photograph  by 
Walker  and  Ccckerell 


P  40.  HENRY  EDRIDGE  (1769-1831),  Elected  A.R.A.  1820 


RUE  DE  LA  GROSSB  HORLOGE,  ROUEN 


In.  the  South  Kensington  Museum 


P  44.  JOHN  CONSTABLE,  R.A. 


TREES  NEAR  IIAMPSTEAD  CHU-iCH 


In  the  South  Kensington  Museum 


P  45.  SIR  CHARLES  LOCKE  EASTLAKE  (1793-1866),  Elected  R.A.  1830,  P.R.A.  1850 


THE  ESCAPE  OF  THE  CARRARA  FAMILY 


In  the  Tate  Gallery 


P  49.  DAVID  ROBERTS  (1796-1S64),  Elected  R.A.  1341 


INTERIOR  OF  THE  CATHEDRAL,  XERE3 


From  the  Water-Colour  in  the  British  Museum 


P  51.  THOMAS  WEBSTER  (1800-1886;,  Elected  R.A.  1846 


beating:  fob  recruits 


In  the  South  Kensington  MuseTim 


P  52.  THOMAS  CRESWICK  (1311-1869),  Elected  R.A.  1351 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE 
ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 


CULPTURE,  like  architecture,  has  rarely 
received  its  due  share  of  encouragement  from 
the  Royal  Academy ;  and  for  this  reason, 
naturally  enough,  the  sculptors,  like  the  archi- 
tects, have  seldom  been  quite  satisfied  with  their 
•  position  as  Academicians.  But  we  must  not 
misunderstand  the  true  origin  of  this  neglect. 
_  It  would  be  unfair  to  say  that  the  Royal 

Academy  has  found  pleasure  in  reducing  architecture  and  sculpture 
to  a  status  below  that  of  the  arts  of  painting.  We  must  remember, 
in  this  connection,  that  the  first  and  foremost  aim  of  the  Academy 
was  to  become  self-supporting  ;  and  hence  it  was  necessary  to  give 
the  first  and  foremost  place  to  those  forms  of  art  which  would 
attract  the  largest  number  of  sightseers  to  the  annual  exhibitions. 
Now,  for  one  person  that  takes  a  serious  delight  in  sculpture  or  in 
-architectural  drawings,  there  are  at  least  a  hundred  who  are  curious 
about  pictures.  In  this  one  fact  is  to  be  found  the  real  cause  of 
the  subordinate  place  which  the  Academy  has  allotted  to  sculpture 
and  architecture.  Not  that  this  explanation  does  away  with  the 
bad  results  of  the  subserviency  in  question;  and  the  need  of  founding 
a  strong  institute  of  British  sculptors  was  long  ago  thought  out  by 
some  of  the  Academicians.  Indeed,  such  an  institution  was  formed 
between  the  years  1 852-1 857. 

After  these  few  words  of  necessary  introduction,  we  may  turn  at  once 
to  the  sculptors  who  were  Foundation  Members  of  the  Academy. 
Setting  aside  Michael  Moser,  a  goldsmith  and  enamel-worker,  we 
find  sculpture   represented  by  only  three  men— Joseph  Wilton, 
Richard  Yeo,  and  Agostino  Carlini.    Richard  Yeo  is  quite  forgotten. 
He  died  in  1779,  having  earned  for  himself  a  good  reputation  as 
chief  engraver  at  the  Mint,  and  also  as  a  medallist,  his  best  efforts 
being  the  Culloden  Medals,  1746  ;  Freemasons  and  Minorca,  1749  ; 
Academy  of  Ancient  Music,  1750  ;  Chancellor's  Medal,  Cambridge, 
1752  ;  and  Captain  Wilson's  Voyage  to  China,  1760.    Yeo  s  con- 
temporary, CarHni,  a  native  of  Geneva,  succeeded  Moser  as  Keeper 
of  the  Royal  Academy  in  1783.    He  was  a  clever  craftsman,  not 
inferior  to  his  better-known  rival,  Joseph  Wilton,  R.A.  (b.  1722,  d. 
1803),  whose  education  in  sculpture  seems  to  have  been  unusually 
thorough  for  an  Englishman  of  those  days.    He  studied  first  in 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 

Brabant  under  Laurent  Delvaux;  in  1744,  at  the  age  of  twenty-two,  he 
went  to  Paris  and  won  the  Silver  Medal  given  by  the  Academy  there  ; 
while  three  years  later  he  journeyed  to  Rome  with  L.  F.  Roubillac, 
where  the  Roman  Academy,  in  1750,  gave  him  the  Gold  Jubilee 
Medal  awarded  by  Benedict  XIV.  Wilton,  having  spent  eight 
years  in  Italy,  returned  to  England  in  1755,  in  company  with 
Cipriani  and  Sir  William  Chambers,  and  started  work  in  London  as 
a  director  of  the  Duke  of  Richmond's  sculpture  gallery  at  Whitehall. 
He  then  came  in  touch  with  the  Court  and  designed  the  coach  that 
was  used  for  the  Coronation  of  George  III.  A  man  of  great 
geniality,  he  was  on  intimate  terms  with  Reynolds  and  Doctor 
Johnson,  and  with  many  other  famous  men  of  his  age.  Wilton's 
best  remembered  work  is  the  large  monument  to  General  Wolfe  in 
Westminster  Abbey,  which,  though  much  too  theatrical,  is  worth 
attention.  The  composition  is  over-crowded,  and  the  lions  at  the 
base  are  ridiculous  ;  but  the  principal  group  has  some  good  modelling. 
Wilton  produced  many  fine  chimneypieces  to  embellish  the  houses 
designed  by  Sir  William  Chambers. 

The  first  sculptor  to  enter  the  Academy  by  election  was  Edward 
Burch.  He  became  an  Associate  in  1770  and  a  Royal  Academician 
in  1 77 1.  He  has  been  mentioned  elsewhere  in  this  volume,  as  a 
gem-engraver,  and  we  now  pass  on  to  one  of  his  admirers,  Joseph 
NoUekens,  R.A.,  a  man  of  somewhat  eccentric  character.  During 
the  ten  years  of  his  stay  in  Italy,  he  purchased  fragments  ot  antique 
marbles  and  terra-cottas  and  carefully  restored  them  into  complete 
works  of  art.  By  this  means  he  introduced  himself  to  many  rich 
collectors,  like  Towneley  and  the  Earls  of  Besborough  and  Yar- 
borough,  and  started  a  profitable  business.  Fortune  was  also  his 
friend  in  several  other  ways,  for  he  made  large  sums  on  the  Stock 
Exchange,  and  received  three  thousand  guineas  for  his  statue  of  Pitt 
(now  at  Cambridge  in  the  Senate  House),  and  ^2000  for  his  too- 
conspicuous  monument  to  Rodney's  three  Captains  (now  in  West- 
minster Abbey).  But  he  grew  generous  as  well  as  rich,  and  was 
generally  liked  as  the  most  picturesque  figure  of  his  day.  NoUekens 
died  in  1823,  in  his  eighty-sixth  year,  leaving  a  fortune  of  more 
than  ;^20o,ooo.  It  is  said  that  he  executed  a  hundred  busts  and 
a  great  number  of  duplicates,  not  to  speak  of  the  semi-classical 
statues,  technically  known  as  "  Venuses,"  that  won  for  him  so 
many  patrons  and  admirers.  His  best  work  is  to  be  found  among 
his  portraits. 

It  would  be  easy  to  exaggerate  the  actual  merit  of  the  work  of 
NoUekens  ;  and  in  this  respect  the  sculptor's  reputation  differs 
s  ii 


PORTRAIT  OP  JOSEPH  NOLLEKENS,  R.A.   (1737-1823.)   ELECTED  1773. 


BY  SIR  W.  BEEOHEY,  R.A. 


After  an  EngraAang  by  Charles  Turner,  A. R.A. 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

widely  from  that  of  John  Bacon  (b.  1740,  d.  1799).  In  Bacon  we 
meet  with  a  Httle-known  sculptor  of  great  ability,  who  may  be 
described  as  one  of  the  strongest  monumental  workers  that  England 
has  yet  produced.  This  may  seem  excessive  praise  to  those  who 
have  not  given  attention  to  such  achievements  as  his  monuments  to 
the  memory  of  the  Earl  of  Chatham,  or,  again,  to  the  memorial  in 
Bristol  Cathedral  to  Sterne's  Eliza,  Mrs.  Draper.  In  estimating 
the  genius  of  John  Bacon,  however,  some  allowance  has  to  be 
made  for  those  characteristics  of  the  eighteenth  century  which  are 
too  artificial  for  the  simpler  taste  of  the  present  time.  For  alJ 
that.  Bacon  has  a  high  place  in  the  history  of  British  sculpture, 
appealing  to  us  by  his  ample  strength  and  his  largely  handled 
modelling.  From  Roubillac  he  borrowed  certain  little  affectations 
of  grace  in  the  composition  of  his  draperies  ;  but  he  did  not  allow 
any  influence  to  subjugate  his  personality.  He  is  not  very  imagina- 
tive, but  the  personal  qualities  of  his  virile  style  have  genius  enough 
to  counteract  the  limitations. 

As  a  contrast  to  the  giant-like  energy  and  skill  of  Bacon  are  the 
gentle  and  classic  talents  of  Thomas  Banks,  R.A.,  whose  Falling 
Titan^  in  the  Diploma  Gallery,  though  somewhat  overburdened 
with  rocks,  has  many  excellent  points.  Banks  perceived,  when  in 
Rome,  that  the  chief  thing  to  be  learnt  from  the  Italians  was  their 
technique  in  marble,  so  he  took  lessons  in  carving,  and  throughout 
his  life  he  impressed  upon  his  brother  sculptors  in  England  the 
need  of  perfect  craftsmanship.  Among  his  best  works  are  the 
Sleeping  Child  (Penelope  Boothby),  in  Ashbourne  Church,  Derby- 
shire, and  the  Portrait  bust  of  Warren  Hastings  here  reproduced. 
Flaxman,  like  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  was  a  great  admirer  of  Banks, 
and  spoke  very  highly  of  his  genius  and  character.  Banks  died  in 
1805,  at  the  age  of  seventy. 

When  a  critic  begins  to  think  of  Flaxman  (b.  1755,  d.  1826),  he  is 
apt  to  be  troubled  by  two  conflicting  thoughts.  He  feels  sure,  as  he 
surveys  the  variousness  and  the  learned  refinement  of  Flaxman's 
work,  that  he  is  here  in  presence  of  a  genius,  a  genius,  too,  of 
high  rank  among  the  most  gifted  men  of  his  century.  But,  some- 
how, side  by  side  with  this  conviction  is  the  belief  that  Flaxman 
attempted  to  do  too  much,  and  that  his  technical  performance,  as  a 
draughtsman  and  modeller,  frequently  lagged  behind  his  noble  gifts 
as  a  composer.  A  famous  Frenchman,  after  studying  some  of 
Flaxman's  illustrations,  once  exclaimed  :  "  Good  gracious,  how  fine 
in  composition,  how  feeble  in  mere  draughtsmanship  !"  This  criticism 
is  too  severe,  but  it  draws  attention  to  the  limitations  of  Flaxman's 

s  iii 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-186S 
technical  equipment.  But  when  the  influence  that  Flaxman  has. 
had  over  the  taste  of  his  countrymen  is  remembered — over  the 
scholar  through  his  book-illustrations,  over  the  household  through 
his  designs  for  silver  and  for  Wedgwood  ware,  and  over  his  brother- 
sculptors  through  his  own  work  and  his  manly  sympathy — when  all 
this  is  remembered,  there  is  good  reason  to  express  gratitude  and 
admiration.  It  may  be  said  of  him  that  he  taught  the  old  Hellenic 
spirit  to  speak  EngUsh  ;  or  perhaps  it  is  truer  to  say  that  Flaxman 
was  born  a  Greek,  like  Ingres  and  like  Keats. 

It  is  something  of  a  fall  to  turn  from  him  to  Charles  Rossi,  R.A.„ 
since  Rossi,  though  a  sculptor  of  some  distinction,  is  not  by  any 
means  a  leader  in  the  EngHsh  school.  There  is  no  difficulty  in 
finding  examples  of  his  work,  as  some  of  his  best  productions  are  in 
St.  Paul's  Cathedral.  One,  a  monument  to  Lord  Cornwallis,  is  in  the 
nave  opposite  to  Flaxman's  Nelson ;  and  two  groups  commemorate,  in 
a  manner  much  too  theatrical,  the  greatness  of  Rodney  and  the  ill- 
starred  fortunes  of  Captain  Faulknor.  The  doubtful  taste  in  these- 
two  groups  belongs  to  Rossi's  period,  when  few  persons  were  shocked 
at  the  appearance  of  extravagance  in  a  monument  destined  for  a 
Christian  church.  Happily  for  Rossi,  he  is  represented  at  St. 
Paul's  by  a  single  figure,  a  statue  of  Lord  Heathfield  that  has. 
real  merit. 

To  a  firm  believer  in  the  present-day  school  of  sculpture,  ranging 
from  Meunier  and  Rodin  to  Frampton  and  Gilbert,  it  must  needs  be 
difficult  to  speak  of  such  sculptors  of  the  past  as  Sir  Richard 
Westmacott,  R.A.  (b.  1775,  d.  1856),  a  pupil  of  Canova,  and  a  man 
whose  mind  was  impregnated  with  the  past  effiDrts  of  his  art  rather 
than  with  its  future  progress.    Few  Englishmen  have  been  received 
in  Italy  with  a  more  ardent  enthusiasm  than  fell  to  the  lot  of  the 
young  Richard  Westmacott.    In  1791  the  Academy  of  Florence 
gave  him  the  first  prize  for  sculpture,  and  shortly  afterwards  the 
Academy  of  St.  Luke  gave  him  the  Pope's  Gold  Medal  for  a  low- 
relief  of  Joseph  and  his  Brethren.    The  aim  of  Westmacott  being 
classical,  he  never  broke  away  from  a  routine  of  dignity  into  a 
mood  of  impassioned  enthusiasm.    Thd  titles  of  his  imaginative 
pieces  describe  his  style  :    Cupid  and  Psyche,   Euphrosyne,  Devo- 
tion,   Cupid  Captive,   A  Nymph  unclasping  her   Zone,    A  Sleeping 
Infant,  and  what   not   besides,  as  though   the  daily  Hfe  of  his- 
time  were  not  filled  with  such  fine  subjects  for  his  art  as  would 
have  brought  into  being  a  new  race  of  sculptors.    Men  who  think 
too  closely  of  the  past  seal  up  their  eyes  to  the  opportunities  that  lie 
in  the  present.    Any  one  who  desires  to  know  something  more  about 
s  iv 


/    ^^^^  x/i/f^/?^ 


2  J//(X^'rn 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
Sir  Richard  Westmacott  should  go  to  Westminster  Abbey  and  look 
at  his  statues  of  Fox,  Pitt,  Addison,  and  Spencer  Perceval ;  and 
then  pass  on  to  the  monument  raised  to  Mrs.  Warren.  In  St.  Paul's 
Cathedral,  too,  there  are  six  examples  of  his  work,  so  that  West- 
macott is  not  likely  to  be  forgotten. 

Sir  Richard's  son,  Richard  Westmacott,  R.A.  (b.  1799,  d.  1872),, 
followed  in  his  father's  steps,  visiting  Italy  and  remaining  there  for 
six  years.    When  he  returned  to  England,  bringing  with  him  a 
thorough  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Roman  art,  it  was  to  find  that 
his  style  was  one  that  would  make  him  popular,  and  widely  known. 
He  was  particularly  fortunate  in  his  portraits  of  ladies.    As  to  his 
monumental  sculpture,  it  is  usually  reposeful  and  impressive,  as  in 
the  figure  of  Archbishop  Howley  in  the  choir  of  Canterbury 
Cathedral.     Students  of  his   work  will  remember  his  Ariel,  his 
Cymbal  Player,  his  Paolo  and  Francesca,  and  his  busts  of  Lord 
John  Russell,  Sir  Frederick  Murchison,  Sydney  Smith,  and  John 
Henry  Newman.    Richard  Westmacott,  in   1857,  succeeded  his. 
father  as  professor  of  sculpture,  and,  in  1 861,  he  represented  England 
at  the  Congress  of  Artists  which  assembled  at  Antwerp. 
Like  the  two  Westmacotts,  William  Theed,  R.A.  (b.  1764,  d.  1817),, 
formed  his  style  in  Italy  by  imitating  the  classic  models.    When  in 
Rome  he  had  the  good  fortune  to  become  the  friend  of  Flaxman  ; 
and  when  he  returned  to  England,  bringing  with  him  a  French  wife,, 
he  followed  an  example  which  Flaxman  had  set  years  before  by 
working  for  the  Wedgwoods.    This  was  an  excellent  training  for 
him,  and  he  carried  it  further  at  a  later  date  by  designing  presentation 
works  in  gold  and  silver  for  Messrs.  Rundell  and  Bridge,  whose  gold 
and  silver  plate  he  designed  for  many  years.    In  1 8 1 1  the  Academy 
received  him  as  an  Associate  ;  he  was  elected  an  Academician  in 
1 81 3.    During  the  last  years  of  his  life  he  produced  some  important 
things  in   sculpture,   like   the   large  statue  of  Mercury  and  the 
bronze    group    of   T/ietis  returning  from    Vulcan    with  Arms  for 
Achilles.    Dying  in  his  fifty-third  year,  he  left  a  family  of  three 
children,   one   of  whom,  William  Theed   by  name,  became  a 
sculptor,  and  his  work  was  greatly  admired  by  Queen  Victoria  and 
the  Prince  Consort. 

There  is  often  a  grim  humour  in  the  ups  and  downs  of  fortune 
Take  the  case  of  Sir  Francis  Chantrey,  R.A.,  who  is  said  to  have 
begun  life  by  driving  an  ass  laden  with  milk-cans,  and  from  working 
in  a  grocer's  shop,  and  who  rose  to  one  of  the  proudest  positions  that 
any  sculptor  has  yet  reached  in  England.  To-day  the  world  has  gone, 
so  far  from  him  that,  if  any  one  were  asked  who  and  what  Chantrey- 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
was,  we  should  probably  get  some  such  answer  as  this  :  "  Why,  the 
man  who  left  the  Bequest  that  the  Academy  is  said  to  muddle  year 
by  year."    Yet  Chantrey's  art  is  still  good  in  several  of  its  phases, 
and  above  all  in  its  treatment  of  children,  and  also  in  its  portraiture. 
A  pretty  story  is  told  of  Nollekens  and  Chantrey.    In  1806,  when 
Chantrey  was  twenty-five,  he  sent  to  the  Academy  a  bust  of  Raphael 
Smith.    Nollekens  was  greatly  struck  and  cried  :  "  It  is  a  splendid 
work  ;  let  the  man  be  known  :  remove  one  of  my  busts  and  put  this 
in  its  place."    The  group  of  the  Sleeping  Children^  a  monument 
in  Lichfield  Cathedral,  is  probably  the  most  beautiful  piece  of 
sculpture  that  Chantrey  has  left  us.    Another  fine  work,  representing 
Lady  Frederica  Stanhope  with  her  infant  child,  is  in  Chevening 
church.    Chantrey  was  a  good  critic,  and  the  delight  he  took  in 
representing  the  realistic  qualities  of  flesh  was  one  influence  that 
helped  our  English  sculpture  to  break  away  from  the  frozen  traditions 
of  an  obsolete  classicism.    Chantrey  died  in  1 841 .    Eight  years  later, 
George  Jones,  R.A.,  published  an  account  of  him,  entitled  "  Sir 
Francis  Chantrey  :  Recollections  of  his  Life,  Practice,  and  Opinions." 
E.  H.  Baily,  R.A.  (b.  1788,  d.  1867),  was  a  pupil  of  Flaxman, 
and  a  winner  of  the  Gold  Medal  in  the  R.A.  Schools.    He  stands 
fairly  high  in  his  profession  as  an  artist,  and  many  will  remember 
his  domestic  subjects,  Hke  Motherly  Love,  while  others  will  recollect 
such  fanciful  pieces  as  Eve  at  the  Eountain,  Eve  listening  to  the  Voice, 
exhibited  in  1841  ;  Hercules  casting  Hylas  into  the  Sea,  Psyche,  The 
Graces  Seated,  and  the  statues  of  Lord  Mansfield  (at  Chelmsford),  of 
General  Sir  Charles  Napier,  and  of  C.  J.  Fox  and  Earl  St.  Vincent. 
Baily's  style  is  remarkable  for  its  grace  and  large-hearted  simplicity. 
He  was  not  a  man  of  transcendent  genius,  but  he  certainly  helped 
the  progress  of  English  sculpture  at  a  time  when  its  up-hill  advance 
was  slow  and  halting.    And  this  applies  also  to  John  Gibson,  R.A., 
whose  name  is  much  more  widely  known  than  Baily's,  but  whose 
reputation  does  not  wear  so  well  as  the  prophets  of  his  time  foretold. 
Gibson  studied  under  Thorvaldsen,  and,  following  the  custom  of  the 
time,  won  his  way  into  the  Academy  with  such  subjects  as  the  Cupid 
of  1829,  the  Nymph  untying  her  Sandal,  1831,  and  the  Venus  and 
Cupid,  1833.    Gibson  died  in  1866,  leaving  an  abundant  amount  of 
work,  among  which  may  be  named  the  Wounded  Amazon  falling  from 
her  Horse,  the  Greek  Hunter  and  his  Dog,  Hylas  and  the  Nymphs,  the 
Hours  leading  forth  the  Horses  of  the  Sun,  the  statue  of  George 
Stephenson,  and  the  monument  to  Sir  Robert  Feel  in  Westminster 
Abbey. 

But  it  is    time  to  speak  of  WiUiam  Wyon,  R.A.    (b.  1795, 
s  vi 


(  d.  1 551) J  who  belonged  to  a  tamous  family  of  m 
t-  enpravers.  and  whose  own  arin  nf  the^  AifFimilt  ^.Tt 

SIR  FRANCIS  L.  CHANTREY,  R.  A.  Up 


of 
}ue 


sou 


CULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1868 

oba!~'   -  -     .  xxr, 

Beq 

lant 

;  tre 

old 

ity-] 

;  w; 

I  be 

le  g 

ledr; 

itre 

tanl 

T  W 

ealii 
scu 
cisn 

Re 

•  (fc 

le  G 

proJ 
:ts, 
s  as 

;  L 

the 

:S  N 

arks 
of 

ich 
;  we 
ler  ' 
int( 
f)h  i 
5on 
h  m 
k  B 
the 
e  m 


o  speak  of  William  Wvon,  R.A.    Cb.  i7qc. 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
d.  1 851),  who  belonged  to  a  famous  family  of  medallists  and  gem- 
engravers,  and  whose  own  grip  of  the  difficult  art  of  the  numismatist 
justly  entitled  him  to  an  honoured  place  in  the  Academy.  Wyon 
followed  Chantrey's  designs  in    his   coins   of  George   IV.  and 
William  IV.  ;  but  made  his  own  for  those  of  Queen  Victoria.    It  is 
said  that  he  produced  two  hundred  pieces  of  work,  ranging  from  his 
war  medals  (that  commemorate  Trafalgar,  Cabul,  Jellalabad,  and  the 
Peninsular  campaigns),  to  the  Portuguese  coinage  that  all  students  of 
his  art  know.    There  is  nothing  really  modern  in  Wyon's  style,  so 
that  we  still  keep  in  touch  with  the  old  subserviency  to  the  classic 
spirit.    Indeed,  Wyon  may  be  said  to  have  suffered  from  too  much 
training.    He  would  have  done  better  work,  probably,  had  his 
talents  been  allowed  in  youth  to  run  wild,  Hke  those  of  the  able 
Irish  sculptor,  Patrick  MacDowell,  R.A.  (b.  1799,  d.  1870),  whose 
genius  was  entirely  self-taught.    It  is  true  that  he  went  to  Rome 
for  eight  months,  but  this  happened  after  the  year  1841,  when,  to 
his  great  surprise,  the  Academy  chose  him  for  an  Associate.  There 
is  a  very  pleasing  freshness,  a  pretty,  ingenuous  grace,  in  the  style  of 
MacDowell,  but  it  cannot  be  said  that  he  broke  new  ground  in  a 
daring  manner,  or  ventured  to  court  unpopularity  by  running  counter 
to  the  accepted  fashion  in  style.    MacDowell,  like  his  fellows,  was 
haunted  by  Cupids^  by  Love  T^riumphant,  and  even  by  a  Girl  in  Prayer. 
There  was  a  First  Thorn  in  Life,  and  a  Slumbering  Student,  and  a  Day- 
Dream;  but  probably  MacDowell's  Irish  nature  was  rejoiced  when  it 
turned  from  such  subjects  to  the  marble  statues  in  St.  Stephen's  Hall, 
representing  William  Pitt  and  the  Earl  of  Chatham. 
From  a  point  of  view  of  simplicity  and  refinement,  there  is  a  distinct 
resemblance  between  MacDowell  and  WilHam  C.  Marshall,  R.A.,  a 
Scotsman,  born  at  Edinburgh  in  18 13.    A  student  of  the  Royal 
Academy,  he  carried  off  the  Gold  Medal  in  1841,  and  then,  instead 
of  looking  at  the  life  of  his  own  time,  he  went  to  Rome,  a  poor  art 
sheep  following  a  beaten  track.    There  is  no  room  here  for  an 
account  of  his  life,  but  the  following  list  of  his  works  may  be  useful 
to  the  student :  The  Creation  of  Adam,  Ophelia,  Una  and  the  Lion,  all 
exhibited  in  1840  ;  the  Broken  Pitcher  (1842),  May  Morning  (1843), 
Caractacus  before  Claudius  (1844),  Hero  guiding  Leander  (1846),  the 
First  Step,  2Lnd  Eury dice  (1847),  a  Toung  Satyr  Drinking  (1848),  the 
statue  of  Thomas  Campbell   (1849),  ^  Hindoo  Girl  (1852),  Fresh 
from  the  Bath  (i860),  and  the  statue  of  Doctor  Jenner,  now  in 
Kensington  Gardens,  and  of  Peel,  in  Manchester.    It  has  been  said 
of  Marshall  that  he  was  a  man  "  with  some  resources  of  a  tangible 
Philistine  sort,  but  with  no  more  poetry,  or  fancy,  or  classic  percep- 

s  vii 


THE  SCULPTORS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
tions  than  a  cow."    There  is  a  certain  amount  of  truth  in  this,  and 
unfortunately  it  applies  to  a  good  many  early  sculptors  of  the  Royal 
Academy.    It  does  not  apply  to  J.  H.  Foley,  R.A.,  who  died  in 
1 874  at  the  age  of  fifty-six.    It  is  much  to  Foley's  honour  that  he 
was  content  to  study  in  England  without  giving  way  to  that  reverence 
for  the  classics  which  had  done  so  mucli  to  hinder  the  development 
of  English  sculpture.    Foley,  to  be  sure,  was  not  daringly  modern, 
but  he  was  true  to  his  own  nature,  and  produced  good  thingt.  His 
most  vigorous  achievements  are  the  equestrian  statues  at  Calcutta  (of 
Lord  Canning,  Viscount  Hardinge,  and  Sir  James  Outram),  and  his 
name  is  remembered  also  by  many  other  statues  and  monuments,  like 
the  Admiral  Cornwallis,  in  Melfield  Church,  the  Clive  at  Shrewsbury, 
and  the  statues  of  O'Connell,  Gough,  Burke,  and  Goldsmith,  all  in 
Dublin.    There  is  perhaps  less  convention  in  Foley's  style  than  in 
that  of  Henry  Weekes,  R.A.  (b.  1807,  d.  1877),  but  both  these  able 
sculptors  have  one  thing  in  common  :  both  lack  the  impassioned 
manHness  which  has  renewed  the  youth  of  sculpture,  thanks  to  the 
heroic  daring  of  Barye,  Rodin,  Meunier,  and  the  great  Alfred 
Stevens,  who  died  without  recognition,  alone  and  in  poverty,  but 
not  before  he  had  shown  that  the  dignity  and  strength  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  character  were  not  at  odds  with  the  genius  of  sculpture. 
That  Henry  Weekes  also  did  some  good  things,  particularly  in 
portrait  sculpture,  no  one  will  deny,  but,  fearing  to  lead,  he  passed 
from  works  of  real  merit,  like  the  Shelley  Memorial  in  Christchurch 
Abbey,  and  dallied  too  often  with  sentimental  trivialities. 
It  cannot  be  said  that  the  earlier  sculptors  of  the  Royal  Academy 
have  frequently  shown  the  enterprise  and  courage  of  pioneers. 

W.  S.  Sparrow. 


s  viii 


S  1.  JOSEPH  WILTON  (1722-1803),  Foundation  Member 


PART  OP  THE  MONUMENT  TO  GENERAL  WOLEE  In  Westminster  Abbey 


S  3.  JOHN  BACON  (1740-1799),  Elected  R.A.  1778 


VENUS 


In  South  Kensington.  Museum 


PORTRAIT  BUST  OP  WARREN  HASTINGS 


Photograph  by  Messrs.  Walker  &  Cockerell 


S  5.  JOHN  FLAXMAN  (1755-1826),  Elected  R.A.  1800 


THE  ARCHANGEL  MICHAEL 


lu  South  Kensington  Museum 


S  6.  JOHN  FLAXMAN,  R.A. 


MOKL"MEi\T  TO  WILLIAM,  EARL  OF  MANiyiELl 


In  Westminster  Abbey 


S  9.  SIR  R.  WESTMACOTT,  R.A. 


.1"  K  PR,  „!  V(  , 


MEMORIAL  TO  ELIZABETH  WARREN 


In  Westminster  Abbey 


S  13.  SIR  P.  CHANTRBY,  R.A. 


;S  14.  JOHN  GIBSON  (1790-1866),  Elected  R.A.  1840 


S  17.  WILLIAM  WYON  (1795-1851),  Elected  R.A.  1833 


MEDALS  OF  SIR  JOHN  SOANE  AND  J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  R.A. 

In  the  Collection  of  C.  Mallord  Turner, 


S  18.  W.  CALDER  MARSHALL  (1813-1894),  Elected  R.A.  1352 


THE  PRODIGAL  SON 


In  the  Tate  Gallery 


S  19.  JOHN  HENRY  FOLEY  (1818-1874),  Elected  R.A.  1858 


STATUE  OF  CHARLES  JOHN,  EARL  CANNING  In  Westminster  Abbey 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL 
ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

HERE  were  some  who  said  that  the  art  of 
engraving  had  been  left  unmentioned  in  the 
Instrument  of  Institution,  only  because  Sir 
Robert  Strange,  the  well-known  engraver, 
had  made  himself  too  notorious  as  an  ardent 
Jacobite.  Sir  Robert  himself  was  delighted 
with  this  explanation  :  it  pleased  his  vanity, 
fired  his  indignation,  and  prompted  him  to 
make  one  of  his  periodical  attacks  on  the  sweet-tempered  Barto- 
lozzi,  who  never  once  deigned  to  retaliate.  In  other  quarters, 
it  was  believed  that  the  Foundation  Members  of  the  Academy  were 
proud,  vainglorious  fellows,  who,  from  a  great  height  of  self-esteem, 
looked  down  upon  the  engravers  and  their  art,  and  regarded  both  as 
wanting  in  such  originality  as  would  justify  their  recognition  by  the 
charter  of  the  Royal  Academy.  There  is  probably  more  truth  in 
this  report  than  there  was  in  the  flattery  which  Sir  Robert  Strange 
was  so  ready  to  accept  as  gospel  truth.  Anyhow,  the  Academicians 
made  a  very  serious  blunder.  To  snub  the  engravers  was  really  to 
harm  themselves,  since  it  was  their  work  that  the  engravers 
translated  and  popularised.  Paintings  were  multiplied  a  thousandfold 
by  the  engraver's  skill,  and  then  distributed  throughout  the  kingdom. 
This  was  an  unpaid  advertisement,  and  the  Academy  wa»  wise  to 
apologise  for  its  mistake  and  so  prevent  the  engravers  from  boycotting 
the  work  done  by  its  Foundation  Members. 

Indeed,  the  first  step  taken  by  the  Academicians,  after  the  opening 
of  the  schools,  was  to  bring  into  existence  a  class  of  members  to  be 
known  as  Associate  Engravers  ;  and  the  rule  by  which  a  number  of 
these,  not  exceeding  six,  should  be  admitted  as  Associates,  was 
passed  on  March  25,  1769.  The  following  year,  five  engravers  were 
elected  —  namely,  Thomas  Major,  Simon  Ravenet,  P.  C.  Canot, 
John  Browne,  and  Thomas  Chambers,  and  in  1775  the  full  number 
was  completed  by  the  admittance  of  Valentine  Green.  How  pleased 
Sir  Robert  Strange  must  have  been  when  the  first  list  of  Associate 
Engravers  became  the  talk  of  the  cofi^ee-houses  !  But  the  main 
point  is  that  the  Academy  had  made  some  amends  for  its  want  of 
tact.  Not  that  the  engravers  were  entirely  satisfied.  They  objected, 
and  long  continued  to  object,  to  that  part  of  the  regulation  which 
denied  them  the  right  of  attaining  full  membership.    Their  efforts 

E  i 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

to  win  for  themselves  the  rank  of  R.A.  went  on  and  on  ;  but  it  was 
not  until  February  10,  1855,  that  the  first  engraver  was  admitted  to 
full  academical  honours,  under  the  Presidency  of  Sir  Charles  Lock 
Eastlake.  This  step  of  progress  was  not  brought  about  by  persuasive 
argument  alone.  It  was  partly  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Academy 
found  it  difficult  to  fill  the  six  associateships  allotted  to  the  engravers 
— a  fact  which  C.  R.  Leslie,  in  1852,  used  as  an  argument  before  his 
colleagues  on  the  Council  ;  and  in  the  same  year  a  petition  to  Queen 
Victoria  was  prepared  and  signed  by  seven  engravers,  including 
G.  T.  Doo,  J.  H.  Robinson,  and  J.  Pye,  praying  her  Majesty  to  give 
her  assent  to  any  proposal  that  the  Academy  might  think  right  to 
make,  with  the  object  of  raising  the  engravers  to  full  membership. 
Queen  Victoria  received  the  petition,  and  recommended  the  General 
Assembly  to  consider  in  what  way  the  wishes  of  the  engravers  could 
be  met,  the  result  of  this  advice  being  a  modification  of  the  laws 
relating  to  the  subject  in  dispute.  It  was  in  1854  that  a  new  class 
of  engravers  was  enrolled,  consisting  of  Academicians  and  Associates, 
who  were  not  to  exceed  four  ;  it  might  consist  of  less  at  the  discretion 
of  the  Academy  ;  and  the  proportion  of  Academicians  was  not  to  be 
more  than  two.  It  was  decided,  also,  that  future  vacancies  in  the 
original  class  of  six  Associate  Engravers  should  not  be  filled  up. 
For  the  rest,  the  first  engraver  to  receive  the  long-coveted  title  of 
R.A.  was  Samuel  Cousins.  This  is  all  that  need  be  said  here  about 
the  actual  rank  of  the  engravers,  though  one  may  point  out  that  the 
grade  is  one  which  the  Academy,  at  any  time,  with  the  consent  of 
the  Sovereign,  may  transform  into  something  quite  different — 
into  a  class,  let  us  say,  of  Craftsmen  Associates  and  Craftsmen 
Academicians  !  And  if  this  were  done,  the  Academy  would  bring 
itself  more  vitally  in  touch  with  the  needs  of  to-day. 
Although  the  art  of  engraving  found  no  place  in  the  Instrument  or 
Institution,  there  was  yet  one  engraver  whom  George  III.  received 
as  a  Foundation  Member.  This  was  Francesco  Bartolozzi,  an  Italian 
of  great  ability  (b.  1728,  d.  1815),  who  came  to  England  in  his 
thirty-seventh  year,  and  remained  faithful  to  his  adopted  country  till 
1 802,  when  he  went  to  Lisbon  to  superintend  a  school  of  engravers. 
The  Prince  Regent  of  Portugal  took  a  great  fancy  to  his  genial  and 
frank  nature,  and  conferred  upon  him  the  honour  of  knighthood.  He 
died  at  Lisbon  in  the  eighty-seventh  year  of  his  age. 
It  is  easy  to  over-estimate  the  real  worth  of  Bartolozzi's  various  plates. 
He  did  so  much  himself  and  owed  so  much  to  his  pupils  that  his  artistic 
output  suffered  in  its  average  of  merit.  But  the  collector  will  find 
many  excellent  things  among  his  prints,  particularly  among  his 
E  ii 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
line-engravings  and  also  among  his  fine  proofs  after  Holbein  and 
Guercino.    It  was  Bartolozzi  who  brought  into  vogue  in  England 
that  kind  of  soft-ground  etching  which  was  first  used  by  the  French 
engraver  Demarteau  in  his  reproductions  of  the  red-chalk  drawings 
by  Boucher.    In  this  process  the  quaHty  of  the  soft  line  was  obtained 
by  the  use  of  a  roulette,  which  gave  a  result  similar  to  that  which 
a  modern  etcher  gets  with  a  pencil  and  tissue  paper. 
We  have  now  to  consider,  very  briefly  and  in  chronological  order, 
the  twenty-two  engravers  who  belonged  to  the  Royal  Academy  during 
the  period  dealt  with  in  this  book.    Thomas  Major,  born  in  17 15  or 
1720,  passed  his  youth  in  Paris,  where  he  studied  in  a  good  school, 
engraving  plates  after  Berghem,  Arnold  Maas,  Wouwerman,  and 
Teniers.     On  his   return   to   England   he   became  a  friend  of 
Gainsborough,  whose  beautiful  Madonna  he  engraved.    His  land- 
scapes after  Claude  and  Poussin,  like  his  general  subjects  after 
Murillo  and  the  early  Dutchmen,  have  a  style  remarkable  for  its 
neat  precision.    Major  lived  to  be  nearly  eighty,  dying  in  1799. 
His  abilities  were  less  remarkable  than  those  of  S.  F.  Ravenet, 
a  Frenchman,  born  in  Paris  about  1706.  He  left  his  native  country,  at 
the  invitation  of  Hogarth,  that  he  might  help  to  engrave  the  famous 
scenes  made  known  to  us  in  the  Marriage  a-la-Mode.    He  worked 
also  for  Alderman  Boydell,  copied  Houbraken's  portraits  for  Smollett's 
"  History  of  England,"  busied  himself  with  the  Italian  old  masters, 
and  turned  out  several  portraits  after  Reynolds.     His  work  has 
colour,  penetration,  and  a  rather  sombre  vivacity.    He  died  in  1774. 
Another  Frenchman  comes  next,  P.  C.  Canot  by  name,  born  in 
1 710,  who,  at  the  age  of  thirty,  came  to  England  and  settled  there 
for  good.    He  was  a  clever  engraver,  and  no  student  of  the  sea  (as 
represented  in  English  art)  should  fail  to  study  his  plates  after  Paton, 
Scott,  and  Peter  Monamy.    As  for  John  Browne,  who  was  born  at 
Oxford  in  1742,  he  must  be  placed  among  the  best  engravers  of 
landscape  that  our  early  EngUsh  school  produced.    He  is  especially 
admirable  in  his  plates  after  Rubens,  G.  Poussin,  Hobbema,  Claude 
Lorraine,  and  Salvator  Rosa.    Woollett  finished  several  pieces  of 
work  etched  by  Browne,  and  among  them  the  Celedon  and  Amelia  in 
Thomson's  "Seasons."    1801  was  the  date  of  Browne's  death,  and 
his  widow  for  thirty  years  received  a  pension  from  the  Academy. 
Browne  was  a  better  engraver  than  his  Irish  contemporary,  Thomas 
Chambers,  whose  prints  after  Murillo's  Holy  Family  and  Van  Dyck's 
Helen  Forman  are  not  sympathetic.    Chambers,  indeed,  had  a  style 
which,  though  firm,  was  cold  and  mechanical.    Being  unsuccessful, 
he  fell  into  despair,  and  drowned  himself  in  the  Thames  in  1789. 

E  iii 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
Valentine  Green,  who  follows  now  in  chronological  order,  was  a 
justly  famous  mezzotint-engraver,  his  work  being  so  various  in  subject 
that  his  admirers  never  tire  of  it.    Born  at  Hales  Owen  in  1739,  he 
started  in  youth  to  read  law  ;  but,  forsaking  this  uncongenial  pursuit 
for  art,  he  began  to  study  line  engraving  at  Worcester,  and  then 
passed  on  to  the  more  coloured  processes  of  mezzotint.    At  the  age 
of  twenty-six  he  came  to  London,  and  soon  proved  that  he  was 
a  thorough  master  of  his  craft.    During  the  forty  years  of  his 
working  career  he  produced  nearly  four  hundred  plates,  including  an 
excellent  selection  from  the  pictures  in  the  Dusseldorf  Gallery.  In 
1798,  when  the  French  laid  siege  to  Dusseldorf,  the  Gallery  and 
castle  were  destroyed,  and  thus  Green's  occupation  there  came  to  an 
end.    He  died  in  London  in  181 3,  leaving  behind  him,  among  his 
best  works,  no  fewer  than  sixteen  plates  after  Benjamin  West  and  the 
same  number  of  portraits  after  Sir  Joshua  Reynolds.    Besides  these,  he 
engraved  three  fine  works  after  Van  Dyck,  one  of  which,  representing 
Henry  Danvers,  Earl  Danby,  will  be  found  among  the  illustrations. 
One  circumstance  in  the  life  of  Francis  Haward  recalls  to  mind 
a  similar  piece  of  bad  fortune  in  the  life  of  John  Browne.    He  died 
in  poverty,  leaving  a  widow,  who,  for  two-and-forty  years,  received 
a  pension  from  the  Academy.    Haward  was  born  in  1759.  In 
1776  he  became  a  student  at  the  Academy,  and  in  1783  he  was  elected 
an  Associate  Engraver.    He  was  a  charming  craftsman,  gentle  and 
suave  in  manner,  full  of  tenderness,  but  sometimes  too  sweet  and 
deHcate.    His  most  vigorous  engraving  is  that  of  Mrs.  Siddons  as  the 
Tragic  Muse  after  Reynolds,  while  the  Infant  Academy  after  the 
same  master  is  probably  the  most  gracious  among  his  prints.  He 
had  his  home  in  Lambeth,  and  died  there  in  1797.  Haward's 
contemporary,  Joseph  Collyer  (b.  1748),  was  another  engraver  who 
was  fascinated  by  the  genius  of  Reynolds,  and  who  showed  real 
penetration  in  his  plates  after  Sir  Joshua's  Miss  Palmer  and  the  Girl 
with  the  Cat.  The  great  painter  himself  was  delighted  with  Collyer's 
interpretation  of  his   Venus  and  Una,  and  Alderman  Boydell  had 
every  reason  to  be  pleased  with  the  print  of  the  Irish  Volunteers  from 
the  picture  by  F.  Wheatley,  R.A.    Collyer's  election  as  A.R.A. 
took  place  in  1786.     Collyer's  pupil,  James  Heath  (b.  1765,  d. 
'  ^35)5  whose  name  is  associated  with  the  work  he  did  after  the  designs 
of  Stothard,  followed  his  master  in  the  taste  he  cultivated  for  book 
illustration,  and  every  artist  for  whom  he  laboured  found  in  him 
a  ready  and  responsive  interpreter.    He  turned  out  several  large 
plates  after  pictures  by  the  Academicians,  like  the  Dead  Soldier  after 
Wright,  the  Death  of  Nelson  after  West,  the  Death  of  Major  Pierson 
E  iv 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

after  Singleton,  or,  again,  like  the  Riots  in  ijSo  after  Wheatley.  It 
was  through  the  influence  of  James  Heath  that  our  next  engraver, 
Anker  Smith  (b.  1759,(1.  1 8 1 9) ,  forsook  the  law  and  became  the 
pupil  of  Taylor,  under  whom  he  worked  for  three  years,  from  1 779 
to  1782.  He  then  joined  Heath  as  an  assistant,  and  it  is  said  that 
Heath  allowed  Smith  to  do  too  much  of  his  work.  Any  one  who 
desires  to  study  Smith  must  hunt  after  his  small  illustrations,  like 
those  in  Bell's  edition  of  the  "  British  Poets  "  or  his  engravings  after 
Smirke's  illustrations  to  "  Don  Quixote."  And  now  a  few  words 
must  be  said  about  James  Fittler  (b.  1758,  d.  1835),  another 
good  engraver  of  book  illustrations.  Many  of  the  plates  in  Bell's 
"  British  Theatre  "  are  by  Fittler,  and  others  will  be  found  in  Dibden's 
"  Aedes  Althorpianae  "  bearing  the  date  1822.  He  did  justice  also 
to  De  Loutherbourg's  spirited  naval  pictures,  the  Battle  of  the  Nile 
and  Lord  Howe's  Victory. 

John  Landseer,  born  at  Lincoln,  in  1769,  lived  to  be  eighty-three 
years  old,  dying  in  1852.  He  had  three  sons,  and  all  became  famous. 
He  was  the  father  of  Thomas  Landseer,  the  mezzotint-engraver,  and 
of  Charles,  a  Member  of  the  Royal  Academy,  and  of  Edwin,  our 
iEsop  of  the  brush.  Among  the  good  things  that  John  Landseer 
engraved  was  a  picture  by  his  son  Edwin,  the  Dogs  of  Mount  St. 
Bernard.  His  line  engravings  for  Bowyer's  History  of  England,  and 
for  Moore's  Views  in  Scotland,  and  for  Macklin's  Bible,  are  well  worth 
attention  ;  and  the  student  of  animals  will  return  again  and  again 
to  his  able  prints  after  Snyders,  Gilpin,  and  Rubens.  In  strong  and 
pleasing  contrast  to  the  work  of  John  Landseer  is  the  art  of  William 
Ward,  the  elder  brother  of  James  Ward,  R.A.,  and  for  some  time  his 
early  teacher.  William  followed  the  mezzotint  process,  and  his 
work  in  this  medium  is  united  for  all  time  with  the  paintings  of  his 
brother-in-law,  George  Morland.  He  and  Morland  lived  together 
at  Kensal  Green  on  the  Harrow  Road,  and  the  friendship  between 
the  two  famines  led  to  a  sort  of  exchange  in  marriage.  Ward  marry- 
ing Maria  Morland,  and  Morland  Anne  Ward.  The  weddings  took 
place  in  the  summer  of  1786,  and  the  two  young  couples  set  up 
their  homes  together,  but  soon  quarrelled  and  separated.  It  may  be 
of  use  to  give  a  list  of  some  of  Ward's  engravings  after  Morland, 
taking  them  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  produced  :  The 
Angler  s  Repast,  1780  ;  Tom  Jones  and  Molly  Seagrim,  1786  ;  Domestic 
Happiness,  1787  ;  Sportsman's  Hall,  1788  ;  the  four  seasons,  1788  ; 
Juvenile  Navigators,  1789  ;  Children  Bird's-nesting,  1789  ;  the  ^te 
Entangled,  1790  ;  Cottagers,  1791  :  Travellers,  1791  ;  The  Woodcutter, 
1792  ;  The  Country  Stable,  1792  ;  The  Barn-door,  1792  ;  The  Farmer  s 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
Table ^  1792  ;  T^he  Sportsman  s  Return^  1792  ;  T^he  First  of  September^ 
Morning  and  Evenings  1794  ;  ne  Farmyard^  ^795  ;  Inside  a  Country 
Alehouse,  ^797  ;  Sailors'  Conversation^  1802;  "Turnpike  Gate,  1806; 
Rabbits,  Guinea-pigs,  The  Warrener,  and  The  Thatcher,  1806  ;  and 
Bathing  Horses,  18 14. 

William  Bromley  (b.  1769,  d.  1842)  made  a  name  for  himself 
by  engraving  for  Macklin's  Bible,  and  by  illustrating  an  English 
history  with  plates  after  designs  by  Stothard.  For  many  years  he 
worked  for  the  trustees  of  the  British  Museum,  engraving  the  Elgin 
marbles  from  drawings  by  Henry  Corbould.  In  addition  to  this,  he 
linked  his  fame  with  that  of  Flaxman,  Fuseli,  Lawrence,  and  other 
Academicians,  and  proved  by  his  print  of  the  Woman  taken  in  Adultery 
after  Rubens  that  the  Academy  did  well  to  elect  him  in  18 19.  The 
lithographer  and  line  engraver,  Richard  J.  Lane  (b.  1800,  d.  1872), 
was  the  grand-nephew  of  Gainsborough,  his  mother  being  a  niece  of 
the  famous  painter.  At  the  age  of  sixteen  he  was  articled  to 
Charles  Heath,  and  he  was  only  twenty-seven  when  his  engraving 
after  Lawrence's  Red  Riding  Hood  won  him  his  way  into  the  Royal 
Academy.  He  was  a  persona  grata  with  everybody,  from  Macready 
and  Malibran  to  the  street  arabs,  and  from  his  occasional  creditors  to 
the  members  of  the  Royal  family.  He  was  a  musician,  as  well  as  an 
artist,  and  his  tenor  voice  made  him  welcome  everywhere.  It  may 
be  said,  indeed,  that  he  had  a  tenor  voice  in  all  his  work,  a  very  sweet 
tenor,  even  too  sweet  very  often.  One  can  have  too  much  gentleness 
and  refinement  ;  and  Lane's  lithographs  and  engravings,  like  his 
drawings  in  chalk  and  pencil,  would  be  all  the  better  if  they  had  more 
real  strength  in  their  constructive  handling.  Lane  finished  a  great 
many  prints  after  Chalon,  LesHe,  Richmond,  Landseer ;  and  in 
the  same  medium  he  achieved  success  in  his  imitations  of  Gains- 
borough's sketches,  in  which  he  does  justice  to  the  original  charm  of 
his  great-uncle's  manner.  Not  less  effective,  as  examples  of  his 
imitative  skill,  are  the  prints  which  he  executed  after  Lawrence. 
Charles  Turner  (b.  1774,  d.  1857)  practised  mainly  in  mezzotint, 
though  he  did  some  notable  things  both  in  stipple  and  in  aquatint. 
Being  a  hard  worker,  he  produced  six  hundred  plates,  two-thirds  of 
which  are  portraits.  He  worked  much  for  his  namesake,  J.  M.  W. 
Turner,  engraving  and  pubHshing  the  first  twenty  plates  of  "  Liber 
Studiorum,"  between  the  years  1 807-1 809.  But  they  squabbled 
over  a  question  of  money,  and  separated  for  a  while  ;  the  quarrel 
was  eventually  made  up,  and  Charles  became  a  trustee  under  the 
conditions  of  J.  M.  W.  Turner's  will.  Among  his  portrait  prints 
it  will  be  enough  to  name  the  following  :  the  Marlborough  Family 
E  vi 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
after  Reynolds,  Lord  Nelson  after  Hoppner,  Sir  Walter  Scott  after 
Raeburn  ;  Charles  X.  of  France,  Mrs.  Stratton,  The  Marquis  Wellesley, 
after  Lawrence,  and  Eastlake's  Napoleon  on  board  the  "  Bellerophon:' 
His  subject  plates  include  the  Age  of  Innocence  (Reynolds),  the 
Beggars  (William  Owen,  R.A.),  the  Water  Mill  (Sir  A.  W.  Callcott, 
R.A.),  and  the  Shipwreck,  after  Turner,  which  is  probably  the 
noblest  specimen  of  the  mezzotint  work  by  Charles  Turner.  There 
is  little  room  in  which  to  speak  of  Robert  Graves,  the  line  engraver 
(b.  1798,  d.  1873),  but  his  art  may  be  followed  in  Dove's  "  English 
Classics,"  in  Caulfield's  "Portraits,"  18 19-1820,  in  Neale's  "Abbey 
Church  of  St.  Peter,  Westminster,"  1818-1823,  as  well  as  in 
Burnet's  "History  of  the  Reformation"  and  the  author's  edition  of 
the  "  Waverley  Novels,"  in  which  he  has  some  capital  prints,  after 
Landseer,  Wilkie,  and  several  others.  His  best  achievement  is 
probably  the  Highland  Whiskey  Still  after  Sir  Edwin  Landseer.  A 
Ime  engraver  of  note,  J.  T.  Willmore  (b.  1800,  d.  1863),  who 
studied  under  William  Radclyffe,  and  worked  under  Charles  Heath 
from  1845  to  1848,  is  another  man  who  owed  much  to  the  influence 
and  supervision  of  J.  M.  W.  Turner.  From  1827  till  1838  his 
thoughts  were  chiefly  given  to  the  "  England  and  Wales "  series  : 
and  Turner  set  great  store  by  his  services.  The  well-known  print 
after  the  Mercury  and  Argus,  recalls  a  little  speculation  that 
Willmore  and  Turner  undertook  together.  Collectors  have  not  yet 
discovered  all  the  beauty  and  value  in  Willmore's  reproductions  of 
the  Old  Temeraire,  the  Golden  Bough,  Childe  Harold's  Pilgrimage,  and 
Anctent  Italy.  There  are  good  qualities  also  in  the  Wind  against  Tide 
after  Clarkson  Stanfield,  R.A.,  and  in  Crossing  the  Bridge  after  Sir 
Edwin  Landseer. 

During  the  Presidency  of  Eastlake,  two  men  were  elected  Associate 
Engravers— Lumb  Stocks  and  J.  H.  Robinson.  The  first  contributed 
to  the  success  of  Finden's  Gallery,  and  produced  many  plates  from 
pictures  in  the  Vernon  Gallery  and  the  Royal  Collections.  There 
is  excellent  workmanship  in  his  interpretations  of  Leslie's  Uncle  Toby 
and  the  Widow  Wadman  and  the  Spanish  Letter-writer  by  John  Phillip, 
R.A.  He  ^passed,  also,  from  W.  P.  Frith's  Evening  Prayer  to  the 
same  artist's  Claude  Duval  and  Many  Happy  Returns  of  the  Day. 
As  for  J.  H.  Robinson,  he  was  a  pupil  of  James  Heath,  whose  manner 
of  hne  engraving  he  followed  with  success.  One  may  give  here  a  few 
examples  of  his  more  noteworthy  plates.  After  Murillo,  the  Flower 
Girl ;  after  Van  Dyck,  the  Countess  of  Bedford;  after  William  Mulready 
R.A.,  the  Wolf  and  the  Lamb  ;  after  Sir  David  Wilkie,  R.A.,  Napoleon 
and  Pius  VIL  ;  and  after  Sir  T.  Lawrence,  Sir  Walter  Scott. 

E  vii 


ENGRAVERS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
We  have  now  to  consider,  in  very  brief  space,  the  two  earliest 
Academician  Engravers — Samuel  Cousins  and  G.  T.  Doo,  who  were 
received  as  full  members,  the  former  in  1855,  the  latter  in  1857. 
Samuel   Cousins   was   a    mezzotint    engraver,   and   a   pupil  of 
S.  W.  Reynolds.    He  was  born  in  1801,  and  died  in  1887.  After 
serving  his  apprenticeship,  he  became  his  master's  assistant  at  a 
salary  of  ^(^250  a  year  ;  but  he  soon  grew  tired  of  his  subordinate 
position,  and  in  1825  or  1826  he  set  up  for  himself.    Cousins  was  a 
man  of  delightful  character  and  a  most  strenuous  and  ardent  worker. 
He  amassed  a  considerable  fortune,  and  gave  some       5,000  to  the 
Royal  Academy,  to  be  held  in  trust  for  the  relief  of  distressed  artists. 
In  1874  he  wished  to  retire  from  work  into  private  life,  but  com- 
missions bound  him  to  a  sort  of  treadmill  existence,  and  it  was 
not  till  1883  that  he  was  able  to  retire.    It  was  in  1825  that 
Cousins   was    engaged   by   Sir  Thomas   Acland    to   engrave  in 
mezzotint  Lawrence's  portrait  of  Lady  Acland  and  her  children. 
When  Lawrence  saw  a  proof,  he  immediately  asked  Cousins  to 
reproduce  the  well-known  picture  of  Master  Lambton.    And  from 
that  time  the  names  of  the  two  artists  have  been  bracketed  together 
in  art  criticism.    Not  that  Cousins  gave  all  his  time  to  the  transla- 
tion of  Lawrence's  portraits.    He  worked  also  after  Sir  Edwin 
Landseer,  as  in  Bolton  Abbey  in  the  Olden  "Time,  the  Midsummer  Night's 
Dream,  and  the  Return  from  Hawking.    And,  again,  he  was  very 
much  struck  with  the  pictures  by  Millais,  and  engraved  the  Order  of 
Release.    But  even  a  short  list  of  the  plates  by  Cousins  cannot  be 
given  here,  as  there  is  barely  space  enough  left  in  which  to  make 
mention  of  the  very  excellent  line  engravings  of  G.  T.  Doo,  R.A. 
(b.  1800,  d.  1886).    He  is  very  well  represented  in  the  illustrations 
by  a  plate  after  Lawrence,  the  Proffered  Kiss,  published  in  1836,  and 
also  by  a  stronger  and  better  work  that  interprets  William  Etty's 
famous  picture,  Mercy  interceding  for  the  Vanquished.    His  small  plates 
after  F.  M.  Newton,  R.A.,  called  Fortia  and  Bassanio,  and  Sterne  and  the 
Grisette,  will  be  interesting  to  all  students  of  the  earlier  Academicians ; 
while  those  who  delight  in  less  frivolous  subjects  will  find  what  they 
need  in  the  best  proofs  of  Doo's  engravings  of  Correggio*s  Ecce  Homo, 
Raphael's  Infant  Christ,  and  the  Resurrection  of  Lazarus,  after  Sebastian 
del  Piombo.    Doo  was  a  Fellow  of  the  Royal  Society  ;  and  in  1853, 
or  thereabouts,  he  not  only  relaxed  his  work  as  an  engraver,  but 
began  to  paint  portraits  in  oils  for  the  naturalists  of  his  time. 

W.  S.  Sparrow. 


E  viii 


E  L.  FRANCESCO  BARTOLOZZI  (1728-1S15)  Foundation  Member 


ASSOCIATES'  DIPLOMA 


Engraved  after  C]priani.    (The  Print  lent  by  Mr.  F.  Pollard) 


E  2.  TRANCESCO  BARTOLOZZI,  R.A. 


LORD  OLIVE 


Engraved-  auer  Uaiic;:.    vThe  Print  lent  by  Mr.  F.  PoUarJ; 


E  4.  FRANCESCO  BARTOLOZZI,  R.A. 


HLR  GKACE  THE  DUCHESS  OF  DEVONSHIRE 


Engraved  after  Downman.    (The  Print  lent  by  Mr.  F.  B.  Darnell) 


E  13.  FRANCIS  ITAWARD,  A.R.A. 


AlES.  SIDDONS  AS  THE  TRAGIC  MUSE   Engraved  after  Reynolds.    (The  Print  lent  by  Messrs.  P.  &  D.  Colnaghi  &  Co.^ 


E  16.  ANKER  SMITH  a7oa-1319;,  Elected  Associate-Engraver  17'J7 


SOFONISBA 


Engraved  after  Titian.    CThe  Print  lent  by  Mr.  F.  B.  Daniell) 


E  18.  JOHN  LANDSEER  (1769-1852),  Elected  Associate-Engraver  m  1806 


THE  ANGEL  BINDING  SATAN  Engraved  after  De  Loutherbotirg  for  Macklm's  £ib!e 

ilri^m  the  Print  m  the  British  Museurn^ 


E  19.  WILLIAM  WARD  (1766-1326),  Elected  Associate-Engraver  1314 


E  21.  WILLIAM  BROMLEY  (1769-13421,  Elected  an  Associate-Engraver  1819 


E  23.  H.ICHARD  JAMES  LANE  (1800-1872;,  Elected  Associate -Engraver  1827 


MRS.  SEYMOUR  BATHLTRST 


Engraved  after  Lawrence.  (The  Print 
lent  by  Messrs.  J.  Rimcll  &  Sons) 


E  24.  ROBERT  GRAVES,  A.R.A. 


THE  ORIGIN  OP  THE  HARP 


Engraved  after  Maclise.    ^Prom  the  Print  in  the  British  Museum) 


NAPOLEON 


Engraved  after  Eastlake.    (The  Print  lent  by  Messrs.  P.  &  D.  Colnaghi  &  Co 


E  26.  CIIAHLES  TURNER,  A.R  A, 


THE  WATER-MILL 


Engraved  after  Callcott 


E  29.  JOHN  H.  ROBINSON  (1796-1371),  Elected  an  Associate -Engraver  1856,  R.A.  1367 


THE  WOLE  AND  THE  LAMB 


Engraved  after  Mulread^r.    (The  Print  lent  by  Mr.  E.  Foliard) 


E,  30.  J.  H.  ROBINSON,  R.A. 


PORTRAIT  OF  SIR  WALTER  SCOTT 


Engraveil  after  Lawrence.     The  Print  lejrt  by  Messis.  Maggs  Brothers) 


I 


E  33.  SAMUEL  COUSINS,  R.A. 


PORTRAIT  OF  PRINCE  METTERNICH-WINNEBURG  Engraved  after  Lawrence.    CFn  ..rait  m  the 

British  Museum) 


E  33.  GEORGE  THOMAS  DOO  (18C0-18S6),  Elected  an  Associate-Engraver  1856,  R.A.  1857' 


THE  PKOFFERED  KISS 


Engraved  after  Lawrence  and  his  Pupil  Wyatt.    (The  Print  lent  by  Mr.  F.  B.  Darnell) 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE 
ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 

HE  names  of  five  architects  are  found  among  the 
Foundation  Members  of  the  Royal  Academy, 
and  in  thinking  of  the  work  of  their  period, 
one  is  often  reminded  of  the  famous  criticism 
in  verse  that  Pope  sent  to  the  Earl  of  Burling- 
ton after  his  Grace  had  published  Palladio's. 
drav^ings  of  the  Antiquities  of  Rome  : 

"  You  show  us,  Rome  was  glorious,  not  profuse. 
And  pompous  buildings  once  were  things  of  use 
Yet  shall,  my  Lord,  your  just,  your  noble  rules. 
Fill  half  the  land  with  imitating  fools  ; 
Who  random  drawings  from  your  sheets  shall  take. 
And  of  one  beauty  many  blunders  make  "... 

No  criticism  could  have  foretold  more  truly  than  this  the  course 
which  English  architecture  was  long  destined  to  take  in  its  vain 
endeavour  to  raise  up  some  Phoenix  of  a  living  art  out  of  the  ashes 
of  dead  classic  styles.  It  is  thus  somewhat  dispiriting  to  think  of 
the  work  done  by  most  of  the  architects  who  have  been  members 
of  the  Royal  Academy.  With  few  exceptions  they  have  been 
slaves  to  precedent,  and  have  done  little  to  give  us  a  set  of  vital  and 
national  traditions  in  architecture.  This  applies  particularly  to  the 
designs  of  our  public  buildings,  for  in  domestic  architecture  there 
has  been  less  imitation  and  more  enterprise  and  originality.  It  is 
true,  no  doubt,  that,  during  the  early  days  of  the  Academy,  the  large 
houses  built  in  the  country  were  houses  rather  than  homes,  inasmuch 
as  their  chief  characteristic  was  grandeur,  not  comfort  or  conveni- 
ence ;  but  even  then  there  was  a  vernacular  style  of  domestic 
architecture,  a  style  encouraged  by  the  middle  classes,  and  its  type 
is  still  admired  in  those  square-built  dwellings  that  are  known  as 
Georgian  and  Queen  Anne. 

However,  if  our  English  architects,  as  a  rule,  have  been  singularly 
reluctant  to  show  initiation,  they  have  certainly  given  proof  of  a 
determined  spirit  in  their  professional  quarrels.  Every  one  has  been 
steadily  faithful  to  the  style  adopted  by  the  little  group  of  workers 
to  which  he  attached  himself  when  young.  Sir  WiUiam  Chambers 
(b.  1726,  d.  1796),  the  first  treasurer  of  the  Royal  Academy,  was 
very  much  opposed  to  the  Greek  revival  begun  in  his  time,  pre- 
ferring to  lead  the  Anglo-Palladian  school,  and  to  prove  how  much 
he  had  learned  in  Italy  from  Palladio,  Vignola,  and  other  Itahan 

A  i 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 

architects.  His  best  work  is  Somerset  House,  which,  though  simple 
in  its  parts  and  dignified,  somehow  seems  to  lack  a  co-ordinating 
strength  in  the  design.  Chambers  built  several  large  mansions  in 
the  country,  like  Milton  Abbey,  in  Dorsetshire,  which  he  carried 
out  in  the  Gothic  style.  His  contemporary,  George  Dance,  R.A., 
Nathaniel's  elder  brother,  was  the  designer  of  Newgate  Prison,  now 
destroyed.  St.  Luke's  Hospital  was  also  built  by  him.  After  the 
death  of  Thomas  Sandby  in  1798,  George  Dance  became  professor 
of  architecture  in  the  Academy,  but  he  resigned  the  office  in  1805, 
without  having  delivered  a  single  lecture.  He  is  little  known  to-day 
as  an  architect,  but  his  original  portrait-sketches  of  the  famous 
persons  of  his  time  are  justly  valued.  He  died  in  1825  in  his 
eighty-fourth  year. 

Thomas  Sandby,  R. A.  (b.  172 1,  d.  1798),  became  Deputy  Ranger 
of  Windsor  Great  Park  when  he  was  twenty-four,  a  position  which 
he  held  until  his  death.  He  began  at  once  to  make  many  improve- 
ments in  the  Park,  and  in  1754  he  thought  out  a  plan  for  the 
construction  of  Virginia  Water,  the  largest  artificial  lake  in  the 
United  Kingdom.  Students  of  his  work  should  consult  his  archi- 
tectural drawings  in  the  Soane  Museum  and  the  Royal  collection 
at  Windsor  ;  though  it  may  be  more  profitable  to  admire  his  water- 
colours,  which  are  not  greatly  inferior  to  those  by  his  well-known 
brother,  Paul  Sandby.  Another  Foundation  Member  of  some  note 
was  John  Gwynn,  who  designed  the  Magdalen  Bridge  at  Oxford 
and  the  English  Bridge  at  Shrewsbury,  and  who  published  a  book 
in  which  many  suggestions  were  given  for  the  improvement  of 
London — suggestions  which  have  since  been  carried  out  by  other 
hands.  The  book  was  entitled  "  London  and  Westminster  Im- 
proved." Doctor  Johnson  wrote  a  Dedication  for  it,  and  lent  his 
support  on  other  occasions  to  the  talents  and  the  schemes  of  Gwynn. 
Then,  as  regards  William  Tyler,  R.A.,  who  died  in  1801,  he  built 
in  1786  the  Freemasons'  Tavern  in  Great  Queen  Street,  a  separate 
building  from  Freemasons*  Hall,  that  Thomas  Sandby  had  erected 
in  1776.  Tyler  was  a  sculptor  as  well  as  an  architect,  and  exhibited 
busts  and  reliefs  at  the  Royal  Academy. 

During  the  Presidency  of  Reynolds  (i 768-1 792)  two  architects 
were  included  among  the  early  Associates.  There  was  Edward 
Stevens,  who  died  in  1775,  five  years  after  his  election  ;  it  was  he 
who  designed  the  Royal  Exchange  in  Dublin.  Then  there  was 
Joseph  Bonomi,  an  Italian,  born  at  Rome  in  1739,  who  at  the  age 
of  twenty-eight  came  to  England  in  order  that  he  might  lend  his 
services  to  the  brothers  Adam,  for  whom  he  did  a  great  deal  of  work. 
A  ii 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 
His  name  is  associated  with  many  country  houses,  like  that  of 
Longford  Hall,  Salop,  and  of  Roseneath  in  Dumbartonshire  ;  but 
Bonomi  is  now  remembered  chiefly  by  the  fact  that  Sir  Joshua  not 
only  took  a  very  keen  interest  in  his  career,  but  resigned  his  Pre- 
sidency in  1790  because  the  members  ran  counter  to  his  wishes  by 
electing  Fuseli  instead  of  Bonomi  to  be  a  Royal  Academician. 
Reynolds  was  greatly  offended,  and  it  required  much  persuasion  to 
make  him  withdraw  his  resignation.  Bonomi  died  in  1808.  Our 
next  architect,  James  Wyatt,  R.A.  (b.  1748,  d.  181 3),  filled  the 
office  of  President  for  twelve  months  when  Benjamin  West  retired 
in  1805,  but  only  to  be  re-elected  in  the  following  year.  Wyatt 
studied  much  in  Italy,  and  when  he  returned  to  England  in  1766  he 
soon  gained  a  wide  popularity,  though  his  Greco-Italian  houses  are 
not  remarkable  for  any  great  diversity  of  conception.  He  had  so 
much  work  to  do  that  he  sometimes  schemed  out  his  plans  as  he 
drove  from  one  client  to  another.  In  1778  he  turned  his  attention 
to  Gothic  architecture,  and  his  misdeeds  in  this  style  caused  Pugin 
to  speak  of  him  as  Wyatt  the  Destroyer.  It  was  a  thousand  pities 
that  he  undertook  to  restore  the  cathedrals  in  England  and  Wales ; 
but  the  true  spirit  of  Gothic  architecture  was  not  understood  in  those 
times,  and  Wyatt  did  his  best,  no  doubt.  His  buildings  in  London 
are  the  Pantheon  in  Oxford  Street  (1772)  and  White's  Club  ;  and  it 
was  he  who  erected  Bowden  Park,  Wiltshire,  Castle  Cootc,  in 
Ireland,  and  Lee  Priory,  in  Kent.  Another  architect  of  Wyatt's 
time,  John  Ycnn,  R.A.,  seems  to  have  devoted  his  talents  to  domestic 
architecture  in  town  and  country.  He  was  a  man  of  fine  character, 
and  George  III.  showed  the  trust  he  had  in  him  by  asking  Yenn  to 
fill  the  post  of  Treasurer,  an  office  then  held  by  special  warrant 
under  the  King's  sign-manual.  Yenn  accepted  the  honour  and 
discharged  the  functions  appertaining  to  it  from  1796  to  1820.  He 
died  in  the  following  year. 

But  we  must  turn  to  a  man  of  greater  note.  Sir  John  Soane  (b.  1752, 
d.  1837),  a  pupil  of  Dance,  the  architect  of  Newgate,  and  the  son  of 
a  small  builder  (some  say  a  bricklayer)  at  Reading.  The  boy  started 
life  as  Dance's  errand-boy,  but  worked  his  way  up  until  he  won  his 
spurs  as  a  very  promising  pupil.  He  studied  also  in  the  schools  of 
the  Royal  Academy,  where  the  Gold  Medal  was  awarded  to  him  in 
1776  for  his  drawing  of  a  triumphal  bridge.  After  this  success  John 
Soane  was  sent  to  Italy  for  three  years,  with  an  allowance  to  pay  for 
his  expenses.  Whilst  in  Italy  he  became  acquainted  with  Thomas 
Pitt,  afterwards  Lord  Camelford,  who  obtained  for  him  the  appoint- 
ment of  architect  to  the  Bank  of  England,  in  succession  to  the  late 

A  iii 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
Sir  Robert  Taylor.  This  happened  in  1788.  The  north-west  corner 
of  the  Bank  kept  him  busy  for  many  years,  and  is  justly  looked  upon 
as  his  masterpiece.  Soane  in  this  work  made  use  of  the  Corinthian 
order  of  the  Temple  at  Tivoli,  but  critics  say  with  justice  that  his 
plans  lack  the  suitability  of  purpose  that  Dance  respected  in  his 
design  of  Newgate.  Soane,  indeed,  though  a  man  of  originality,  had 
an  eccentric  bias  of  mind  which  constantly  tempted  him  to  lose 
dignity  and  proportion  by  a  display  of  inappropriate  details.  His 
tastes,  again,  as  is  proved  by  the  museum  which  he  bequeathed  to 
the  nation,  were  too  diffuse,  too  eclectic,  though  they  certainly  did 
much  in  his  day  to  stimulate  interest  in  the  fine  arts. 
Only  one  architect  was  added  to  the  list  of  Associates  during  West's 
presidency — Joseph  Gandy,  who  became  a  student  of  the  Royal 
Academy  in  1789,  whose  design  for  a  triumphal  arch  won  the  Gold 
Medal  in  1790,  and  whose  career  as  an  Associate  began  in  1803,  and 
ended  with  his  death  in  1844.  He  was  the  elder  brother  of  J.  P. 
Gandy,  R.A.,  also  an  architect,  born  in  1787  and  dying  in  1850. 
J.  P.  Gandy  began  his  professional  life  by  going  on  a  mission  to 
Greece  for  the  Dilettante  Society.  When  he  returned  he  and 
William  Wilkins,  R.A.,  built  the  University  Club-house,  finishing 
their  work  1826.  A  few  years  later,  in  1831,  J.  P.  Gandy  erected 
Exeter  Hall  in  the  Strand.  Between  the  two  dates  just  given  he  had 
changed  his  name  to  Deering,  having  inherited  a  landed  property  in 
Buckinghamshire.  He  now  lost  touch  with  his  profession,  and  tried 
his  luck  as  a  Member  of  Parliament,  representing  Aylesbury  after  the 
passing  of  the  Reform  Bill. 

But  a  greater  name  than  either  of  these  is  that  of  Sir  Robert  Smirke, 
R.A.,  the  eldest  son  of  Robert  Smirke,  R.A.,  and  the  brother  of 
Sydney  Smirke,  also  an  Academician.  He  was  born  in  1780,  and 
received  his  first  teaching  in  art  from  his  father.  At  the  age  of 
sixteen  he  entered  the  schools  of  the  Academy,  and  in  1799  he 
carried  ofi^  the  Gold  Medal  with  his  design  for  a  national  gallery  for 
paintings.  He  then  started  on  a  tour  through  Italy,  Greece,  Sicily, 
and  Germany,  returning  to  England  in  1805.  The  following  year 
he  published  a  folio  volume  entitled  "  Specimens  of  Continental 
Architecture  "  ;  and  his  interest  in  the  remains  of  the  earlier  styles 
was  shown  also  in  his  contributions  to  Donaldson's  "  Antiquities  ot 
Athens,"  not  to  speak  of  other  publications.  His  first  efibrt  as  an 
architect  was  Covent  Garden  Theatre,  a  building  carried  out  in  the 
Greco-Doric  style,  having  a  large  portico  decorated  with  sculpture 
in  relief  by  Flaxman.  The  interior  of  the  theatre  was  altered  in 
1856.  Among  the  other  achievements  of  Smirke's  busy  life  one  may 
A  iv 


Sir  Robert  Tavlor.    This  haooened  in  ttRR.    The  nnrf-h-wpst-  rnmet 


FROM  THE  ORIGINAL  PENCIL  DRAWING  BY  SIR  CHARLES  BARRY,  R.  A. 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

mention  the  Mint  (erected  in  181 1),  the  General  Post  Office  in  St. 
Martin's-le-Grand  (begun  in  1823,  finished  in  1829)  ;  the  College 
of  Physicians  and  the  Union  Club  in  Trafalgar  Square  ;  King's 
College,  London,  1831  ;  the  extension  of  King's  Bench  Walk  at  the 
Inner  Temple  ;  the  restoration  of  York  Minster ;  and,  last  of  all,  his 
masterpiece,  the  British  Museum,  commenced  in  1823  and  completed 
in  1847.  This  important  building  of  the  Greco-Ionic  order  has  a 
frontage  370  feet  long,'  with  many  columns  in  the  portico,  each 
measuring  forty-five  feet  in  height  and  five  feet  in  diameter.  The 
alto-relievo  in  the  tympanum  is  the  work  of  Westmacott,  the 
Academician.  Smirke  entered  the  Academy  as  R.A.  in  181 1,  was 
appointed  treasurer  in  1820,  and  held  this  office  till  1850.  Nine 
years  later,  on  May  20,  old  age  and  failing  health  caused  Sir  Robert 
to  resign  his  position  as  an  Academician,  and  his  brother  Sydney  was 
appointed  in  his  stead. 

Sydney  Smirke,  R.A.  (b.  1798,  d.  1877),  another  winner  of  the 
Gold  Medal  for  architecture  in  the  R.A.  Schools  (18 19).  According 
to  the  custom  of  the  time,  he  travelled  through  Italy  and  the 
Continent,  thinking  more  of  the  self-imposed  duty  of  adapting  old 
styles  than  of  showing  some  little  respect  for  the  independence  of 
his  own  good  sense  and  talents.  It  was  he  who  helped  his  brother 
to  build  the  Oxford  and  Cambridge  University  Club,  his  share  in 
this  undertaking  being  the  hideous  Corinthian  front  in  Pall  Mall. 
We  owe  to  him  also  the  Reading-room  of  the  British  Museum,  and 
the  Carlton  Club,  Pall  Mall,  in  imitation  of  the  Library  of  St.  Mark's, 
Venice,  by  Sansovino.  Sydney  Smirke  became  an  Associate  in  1 847, 
an  Academician  in  1859,  and  in  i860  succeeded  Mr.  Cockerell  as 
professor  of  architecture. 

Sir  Charles  Barry,  R.A.,  the  architect  of  the  Houses  of  ParHament, 
was  born  in  1795,  in  Bridge  Street,  Westminster,  a  street  opposite 
the  clock-tower  in  his  famous  building.  Another  singular  coincidence 
is  the  fact  that  the  first  drawing  he  exhibited  at  the  Academy,  in 
1 8 12,  was  a  view  of  the  interior  of  Westminster  Hall.  On  the 
death  of  his  father  in  181 6,  he  came  into  some  property,  and  there- 
upon he  began  to  waste  time  in  the  usual  trips  through  Italy  and 
Greece.  But  it  is  worth  noting  that  his  mind,  during  his  travels, 
was  not  wholly  given  to  the  usual  course  of  plagiaristic  study.  He 
wras  an  admirable  sketcher,  and  his  trip  up  the  Nile  and  through  the 
Holy  Land  was  illustrated  by  himself  and  afterwards  engraved  among 
Finden's  "  Landscape  Illustrations  of  the  Bible."  Then,  as  regards 
his  buildings,  it  is  well  to  mention  the  Travellers'  Club  (1832),  the 
College  of  Surgeons  (1835),  Birmingham  Grammar  School  (1833), 

A  V 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 
Bridgwater  House  in  the  Green  Park  (i  847-1 850),  and  the  houses 
which  he  reconstructed  in  the  country  for  the  Duke  of  Sutherland — 
Trentham,  Cliefden,  and  Dunrobin  Castle.  Sir  Charles  Barry  died 
very  suddenly  on  May  12,  i860,  and  was  buried  ten  days  later  in 
Westminster  Abbey.  It  has  been  said  of  him  with  truth  that  he 
marks  the  close  of  the  classic  revival.  The  Gothic  influence  became 
all  important  even  before  Barry  died,  since  the  followers  of  that  style 
not  only  led  the  way  at  the  great  Exhibition  of  1851,  but  laid  a  sure 
foundation  for  the  progress  which  the  arts  and  crafts  have  made  since 
those  times.  Barry  began  the  Houses  of  Parliament  in  1837,  and 
brought  them  to  completion  in  i860.  The  House  of  Lords  was 
opened  on  April  15,  1847,  while  the  nearly-finished  House  of 
Commons  was  first  visited  in  state  by  Queen  Victoria  on  February  2, 
1852.  The  architect  was  knighted  at  Windsor  Castle  on  the  nth 
of  the  same  month.  Professor  Bannister  Fletcher  remarks  that  "  the 
immediate  effect  of  the  design  of  this  great  building  was  slight.  It 
was  the  climax  of  the  first  idea  of  the  movement — that  of  carrying 
on  the  Tudor  style — so  that,  at  the  time  of  its  completion,  in  i860,, 
the  attention  of  all  was  riveted  on  the  earlier  phases  of  mediaeval 
architecture,  which  every  one  was  engaged  in  imitating." 
Sir  Jeffrey  Wyatville,  R.A.  (b.  1766,  d.  1840),  was  first  known  to- 
the  world  as  Jeffrey  Wyatt,  being  the  son  of  Joseph  Wyatt  and 
the  nephew  of  James  Wyatt,  R.A.  He  was  a  boy  of  great  spirit, 
and  on  two  occasions  ran  away  from  home  to  become  a  sailor,  but 
was  pursued  and  brought  back.  When  the  American  War  came  ta 
an  end,  Jeffrey  Wyatt  gave  up  his  wish  to  follow  the  sea  as  a 
profession,  and  entered  the  office  of  his  uncle,  Samuel  Wyatt,  art 
architect,  with  whom  he  remained  for  seven  years.  He  then  became 
the  pupil  of  his  uncle  James,  so  that  he  might  study  Gothic  and  Old 
English  architecture.  In  1823  the  Academy  received  him  as  an 
Associate,  and  the  higher  honour  was  conferred  upon  him  in  1826. 
The  year  following  his  election  as  Associate,  he  was  summoned  one 
day  to  Windsor  by  the  King,  who  invited  him  to  remodel  the  Castle. 
Jeffrey  Wyatt  brought  this  great  work  to  completion  between  the 
years  1824  and  1828,  at  a  cost  of  over  ^700,000.  On  August  12, 
1824,  when  George  IV.  laid  the  first  stone  of  the  main  entrance  into- 
the  quadrangle  on  the  south  side,  Jeffrey  Wyatt,  by  Royal  authority,, 
changed  his  name  to  Jeffrey  Wyatville,  so  that  he  might  be  known 
from  the  other  architects  of  his  family  name.  He  was  not  knighted 
until  December  9,  1828.  The  transformation  of  Windsor  Castle 
brought  into  vogue  a  style  of  castellated  country-house,  a  style  that 
remained  true  internally  to  the  modern  requirements  of  a  house,  but 
A  vi 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1 768-1 868 

externally  imitated  the  battlements  and  turrets  of  ancient  Edwardian 
castles. 

Among  the  contemporaries  of  Wyatville,  William  Wilkins,  R.A., 
occupies  a  place  of  some  distinction,  although  the  work  by  which  he 
is  best  known — namely,  the  National  Gallery — has  always  been 
severely  criticised.  But  Wilkins  was  so  fettered  by  conditions  during 
the  six  years  (i 832-1 838)  in  which  he  was  occupied  upon  this 
building  that  he  had  really  no  fair  chance  to  accomplish  what  he 
wished  to  do.  Wilkins  is  always  named  in  connection  with  the 
University  College,  London  ;  St.  George's  Hospital,  London  ;  the 
Grange  House,  Hants  (1820)  ;  New  Court,  Trinity  College,  Cam- 
bridge ;  the  New  Buildings,  King's  College,  Cambridge  ;  and 
Downing  College,  Cambridge.  He  was  born  in  1778,  and  died  in 
1839.  After  the  death  of  Sir  John  Soane  in  1837,  Wilkins  was 
elected  to  succeed  him  as  professor  of  architecture  in  the  Academy. 
Professor  C.  R.  Cockerell,  R.A.  (b.  1788,  d.  1863),  having  travelled 
in  Greece  and  Italy,  published  the  well-known  book  the  "Greek 
Temples  of  iEgina  and  Bassas."  It  was  he  who  built  the  Taylor  and 
Randolph  Institute  at  Oxford,  Lampeter  College,  the  Sun  Fire  Office, 
Threadneedle  Street,  London,  now  altered  and  spoilt,  and  the  Banks 
of  England  at  Manchester,  Liverpool,  Bristol.  It  was  he,  too,  after 
the  death  of  H.  L.  Elmes  (1847),  ^^^^  finished  the  interior  decoration 
of  St.  George's  Hall,  Liverpool,  the  best  work  of  the  classical  school 
in  England.  Cockerell  followed  Wilkins  as  teacher  of  architecture 
in  the  Academy,  and  in  his  lectures  he  called  special  attention  to  the 
forms  of  architecture  familiar  to  the  student's  eyes,  and  above  all  to 
the  great  works  of  Wren.  Indeed,  Cockerell  never  tired  of  doing 
honour  to  Wren's  genius,  and  once,  in  1838,  he  exhibited  at  the 
Academy  a  design  in  which  all  the  principal  works  of  Wren  were 
arranged  together  and  drawn  to  the  same  scale.  The  real  bent  of 
Cockerell's  mind  was  towards  the  classic  styles  based  on  Greek  and 
Roman  types.  But  he  felt,  too,  the  influence  of  the  Gothic  revival, 
as  is  proved  by  the  College  at  Lampeter  and  the  Chapel  at 
Harrow. 

We  turn  now  to  the  last  two  architects  who  were  members  of  the 
Academy  during  the  years  which  separate  the  death  of  Eastlake  from 
the  Foundation  of  the  Society  under  Reynolds.  These  were  Philip 
Hardwicke,  R.A.  (1841),  and  Sir  George  Gilbert  Scott,  who  became 
an  Academician  in  i860.  PhiHp  Hardwicke,  a  Londoner  by  birth, 
born  in  1792,  was  the  son  of  John  Hardwicke,  an  architect  of  note. 
After  studying  at  the  Royal  Academy  and  visiting  France  and  Italy, 
he  in  his  twenty-fourth  year  was  appointed  to  the  position  of  architect 

A  vii 


THE  ARCHITECTS  OF  THE  ROYAL  ACADEMY,  1768-1868 

to  the  Hospitals  of  Bridewell  and  Bethlehem,  a  position  which  he 
held  for  twenty  years.  In  1825  Hardwicke  and  Telford,  the  engineer, 
built  St.  Katharine's  Docks  ;  two  years  later  he  took  his  father's  place 
as  architect  to  St.  Bartholomew's  Hospital ;  and  in  1829  he  served 
in  the  same  capacity  to  the  Goldsmiths'  Company,  and  started  to 
erect  their  New  Hall,  a  very  important  piece  of  work  that  was  not 
completely  finished  until  1835.  For  the  Goldsmiths'  Company,  in 
1832,  he  designed  the  Tudor-Gothic  Grammar  School  at  Stockport, 
while  in  1842  he  began  the  New  Hall  and  Library  for  the  Benchers 
of  Lincoln's  Inn — a  structure  in  red  brick  and  in  the  Tudor  style. 
In  this  latter  work  the  architect  was  assisted  by  his  son,  Mr.  P.  C. 
Hardwicke,  after  being  overtaken  by  an  illness  from  which  he  never 
quite  recovered. 

Then,  with  regard  to  Sir  George  Gilbert  Scott  (b.  18 10,  d.  1877),  it 
is  well-known  that  the  first  large  public  work  with  which  he  was 
connected  was  the  Martyrs'  Memorial  at  Oxford,  that  he  and  Mr. 
W.  B.  MofFatt  carried  out  together.  In  1846,  after  dissolving 
partnership  with  Mr.  Moffatt,  he  won  a  great  reputation  in  Germany 
by  his  design  for  the  Church  of  St.  Nicholas  at  Hamburg,  a  Gothic 
building  higher  internally  than  any  English  cathedral  except 
Westminster  and  York.  Among  the  many  other  churches  erected 
by  Scott  one  may  refer  to  Camberwell  Church,  St.  Mary's  Cathedral, 
Edinburgh,  St.  Mary  Abbotts,  Kensington,  St.  George's,  Doncastcr 
(1853),  St.  Mary's,  Stoke  Newington,  St.  Andrew's,  Ashley  Place, 
London,  and  the  Cathedral  of  St.  John,  Newfoundland.  To  him 
we  owe  several  fine  country  houses,  like  Kelham  Hall,  near  Newark, 
Walton  House,  Warwick,  and  Ripbrook  House,  near  Dorking. 

W.  S.  Sparrow. 


A  viii 


NOTES  ON  PORTRAITS  OF  SOME 
LEADING  ACADEMICIANS 


^^^^^^^^^&A  IDE  by  side  with  the  history  of  achievement  in 
^^^^^^^      art  there  must  have  been  going  on  in  each 
^^^"^■^    lllx      succeeding  generation,  overlapping  from  one  to 
^^-?S\2]^W^\    the  other,  the  story  of  friendships  made  by 
W  ^VmIx^^  drawn  together  by  the  practice  of  the 

uu  //^^J-^^A^^^"^^  crafts  ;  there  must  have  been  the  social 
life,  where  opinions  were  formed  and  ex- 
^"'"^  "^^^  pressed  which  ultimately  took  shape ;  and 
in  dealing  with  a  record  of  the  Academy,  this  social  life  is  out 
of  place,  except  in  so  far  as  it  finds  expression  in  the  business  of 
the  institution.  But  the  portraits  chosen  for  reproduction  just 
hint  at  this  side  of  things,  and  it  is  permissible  to  believe  that 
several  of  them  were  inspired  by  friendship.  It  is  seldom  on  record 
that  a  painter  commissions  his  own  portrait  from  a  fellow  painter. 
In  some  cases,  of  course,  the  distinction  of  the  sitter  made  it  a 
profitable  speculation  to  publish  in  an  engraving  his  portrait,  or,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  Presidents,  portraits  were  commissioned  by  the 
members  themselves  or  the  interested  public.  The  love  of  artists 
for  that  form  of  self-analysis  which  displays  itself  in  the  portray- 
ing of  their  own  features  has  been  often  attributed  to  the  vanity 
supposed  to  be  consistent  with  the  artistic  temperament.  No 
love  of  his  own  features  in  some  cases  could  have  betrayed  the 
all  too  sensitive  artist  into  this  indiscretion.  But  the  belief  which 
has  carried  most  painters  forward  in  their  endeavour — the  belief  in 
the  verdict  of  posterity  in  their  favour,  is  the  particular  form  of 
vanity  with  which  they  may  be  charged.  The  shuffling  of  the  cards 
in  the  hands  of  Time  has  altered  the  position  of  many  a  favourite,  and 
brought  forward  from  comparative  obscurity  others  whose  belief  in 
themselves  could  alone  have  sustained  them  against  their  adversities. 
There  are  cases  such  as  that  of  Bartolozzi's  in  which  affection 
dictated  many  portraits  of  him,  and  in  his  case  we  have  an  instance 
of  one  who  counted  on  the  popularity  of  his  work  in  his  own  time, 
and  whose  name  since  his  death  has  increased  in  reputation.  In 
the  case  of  Turner,  towards  the  end  of  his  life  more  than  one 
portrait-sketch  may  have  been  provoked  by  his  eccentricity,  and  the 
joy  of  the  hunter  was  there  also,  for  it  was  something  to  circumvent 
and  capture  a  likeness  of  the  evasive  and  retiring  painter,  who, 
though  so  anxious  for  the  nation  to  have  the  best  of  all  his  work, 

L  A  i 


NOTES  ON  PORTRAITS  OF  SOME  LEADING  ACADEMICIANS 
sought  ever  to  efface  himself.  A  right  instinct  as  to  the  value  that 
would  eventually  be  set  on  the  genius  of  Turner  gave  persistency  to 
the  endeavours  of  his  contemporaries  to  picture  him  as  he  w^s. 
His  portrait  of  himself  as  a  young  man  is  the  portrait  of  that  side 
of  him  which  lives  in  his  art.  The  drawing  by  George  Dance, 
which  is  reproduced,  is  a  sympathetic  rendering  of  the  noble  cast  of 
his  features,  always  retained,  though  as  old  age  advanced,  and  with 
it  growing  eccentricity  and  indifference  to  appearances,  it  became 
less  patent  to  those  who  were  not  sympathetic. 

Bartolozzi  seems  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  beloved  of  the  members 
who  first  constituted  the  Academy  ;  the  kindly  heavy  face  is  well 
portrayed  in  the  Engraving  reproduced,  and  seems  to  be  an  excellent 
likeness,  judging  by  the  fact  that  the  picture  in  the  National  Portrait 
Gallery  of  the  famous  engraver  by  Opie,  although  full-face,  attri- 
butes a  similar  expression  of  smiling  common  sense  to  the  sitter. 
And  the  engraving  reproduced  of  Carlini,  Bartolozzi  and  Cipriani 
does  not  show  any  of  that  confliction  in  the  matter  of  likeness,  which 
in  many  cases  makes  it  so  difficult  to  know  exactly  how  this  or  that 
painter  may  have  looked  at  any  period  of  his  life.  In  his  calling 
Bartolozzi  was  so  frequently  associated  with  Cipriani,  who  more  than 
any  one  else  furnished  the  paintings  and  drawings  for  his  graver^ 
that  a  picture  including  them  both  gathers  some  interest  as  a  portrait 
of  two  friends  of  whose  happy  co-operation  we  see  the  outcome  in  so 
many  works  of  genius.  In  this  picture  he  has,  with  his  fine  clothes, 
all  the  air  of  prosperity  that  his  talents  and  his  personal  popu- 
larity brought  him.  This  painting  has  also  the  title  of  "  Three 
Italian  Artists,"  and  was  painted  by  Rigaud  as  a  pendant  to  the 
portraits  of  "  Three  English  Artists "  (Sir  Joshua  Reynolds,  Sir 
William  Chambers  and  Joseph  Walton),  a  painter,  an  architect,  and 
a  sculptor.  Another  portrait  of  Sir  William  Chambers  engraved  by 
Houston  is  also  reproduced. 

The  portrait  that  we  give  of  Benjamin  West  shows  him  as  he  was 
as  President,  and  behind  him,  on  an  easel,  is  depicted  a  painting, 
in  all  probability  "  Death  on  the  Pale  Horse,"  a  subject  upon  which 
he  was  engaged  about  this  time.  There  is  another  portrait  of 
West  in  the  National  Portrait  Gallery,  painted  by  Gilbert  Stuart. 
Some  of  the  most  interesting  and  reliable  contemporary  portraits  arc 
by  George  Dance,  R.A.  It  were  well  if  in  every  generation  there 
were  some  able  artist  who  would  give  to  posterity  these  valuable 
souvenirs  of  celebrated  painters  of  his  time,  for  from  studies  such  as 
these  one  gains  a  truer  impression  of  the  individuality  of  their  subject 
than  from  the  formal  poses  and  conventional  attributes  of  large 
L  A  ii 


PORTRAIT  OF  J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  R.A. 


BY  CHARLES  TURNER,  A. R.A. 


From  the  Painting  m  the  Collection  of  C.  M.  W.  Turner,  Esq. 


NOTES  ON  PORTRAITS  OF  SOME  LEADING  ACADEMICIANS 

canvases.  Cosway  has  left  a  monument  to  himself  and  his  art  in  a 
miniature  in  the  National  Portrait  Gallery.  Very  similar  in  pose  to 
the  portrait  of  Northcote  in  the  engraving,  here  reproduced,  is  the 
picture  of  him  in  the  same  gallery,  although  the  one  there  was 
painted  by  himself,  and  that  from  which  the  illustration  is  taken  is 
by  Harlow.  For  some  reason  Fuseli  appears  to  have  had  no  great 
admiration  for  the  face  of  his  fellow  Academician,  since  he  said,  in 
describing  Northcote's  nervous  face,  that  it  looked  like  a  rat  which 
had  seen  a  cat. 

The  portrait  of  Fuseli  here  reproduced  illuminates  this  remark.  One 
sees  in  the  face  there  portrayed  of  that  self-centred  Academician  a 
certain  cynicism  and  downrightness  that  would  lend  emphasis  to 
such  a  remark,  and  this  is  borne  out  by  the  impetuosity  depicted  in 
the  face  in  the  Artists'  Gallery.  There  is  also  a  portrait  of  this 
painter  in  the  National  Gallery.  To  George  Dance  again  we  are 
indebted  for  the  fine  drawing  of  Hoppner.  In  the  engraving  by 
Cousins  after  the  portrait  of  Sir  Thomas  Lawrence  we  are  shown 
him,  except  for  a  small  palette  in  his  hand,  exactly  as  he  is  in  Evans' 
portrait  in  the  Portrait  Gallery.  The  engraving  is  after  the  painting 
by  Lawrence  of  himself  now  in  the  possession  of  the  Royal  Academy, 
from  which  Richard  Evans  copied  the  one  in  the  Portrait  Gallery, 
and  save  for  the  palette  which  he  added,  it  would  be  difficult  to  dis- 
tinguish them  if  placed  side  by  side. 

There  is  a  portrait  of  Flaxman  in  the  Gallery  by  George  Romncy, 
representing  him  modelling  the  bust  of  Hayley,  whose  son,  a  pupil 
of  Flaxman's,  is  introduced  into  the  picture.  It  cannot  by  any 
means  be  considered  a  good  Romney,  and  was  apparently  sketched 
in  quite  rapidly  after  the  manner  of  some  of  his  paintings  of  women, 
though  entirely  lacking  the  mastery  that  characterises  his  sketches 
of  Lady  Hamilton.  A  far  better  likeness  of  the  sculptor,  we  may 
presume,  is  the  engraving  by  C.  Turner  after  the  portrait  by  Jackson. 
There  is  a  portrait  of  Sir  William  Beechey  in  the  National  Portrait 
Gallery  begun  by  himself,  and  finished  from  the  life  by  John  Wood  ; 
the  illustration  is  after  a  drawing  by  W.  Evans.  In  the  same 
Gallery  there  is  a  portrait  of  Eastlake  in  the  painting  of  the  "  Fine 
Arts  Commission  "  Meeting  at  Whitehall  in  1846.  This  picture 
contains  twenty-eight  portraits,  and  was  painted  by  John  Partridge, 
but  has  now  fallen  into  such  a  state  of  decay  through  the  artist's 
use  of  injurious  mediums,  that  it  is  no  longer  fit  for  exhibition,  though 
a  photographic  reproduction  is  to  be  seen  in  the  National  Portrait 
Gallery.  In  the  same  Gallery  there  is  an  interesting  portrait  of 
Alderman  Boy  dell.    He  was  Lord  Mayor  of  London  in  1791,  and  is 

L  A  iii 


NOTES  ON  PORTRAITS  OF  SOME  LEADING  ACADEMICIANS 
painted  in  robes.  To  his  enterprise  and  encouragement  many  of  the 
engravers  of  the  early  nineteenth  century  owe  some  measure  of  their 
success,  and  not  a  few  of  the  originals  from  which  the  reproductions 
in  the  Engravers'  section  were  taken  were  published  originally  by  him. 
The  portrait  of  Nollekens  in  the  National  Portrait  Gallery  shows  the 
successful  sculptor  with  a  kindly  humorous  face,  but  he  is  described  on 
the  label  of  the  frame  as  an  "  Eminent  sculptor,  and  noted  for  his 
parsimonious  habits  " — surely  a  quite  superfluous  commemoration. 
In  a  special  plate  is  given  another  portrait  of  the  sculptor.  In  the 
Painters'  section,  as  representative  of  ZofFany's  art,  there  is  reproduced 
his  portrait  of  Gainsborough  in  the  National  Gallery,  thus  serving, 
as  in  several  other  cases,  the  double  purpose  of  representing  by  one 
plate  the  work  of  one  Academician  and  the  portrait  of  another. 

T.  Martin  Wood. 


L  A  iv 


A  1.  PORTRAIT  OF  SIR  JOSHUA  REYNOLDS,  P.R.A. 


Aft.ei'  an  Engraving  by  Valentine  Green,  A.R.A. 


(Print  lent  by  Messrs.  Maggs  Bros.) 


From  the  Painting 
Sir  Joshua  Reynold 


A  3.  PORTRAIT  OF  FRANCESCO  BARTOLOZZI,  R.A. 


After  an  Engraving  by  I.  Bouillard 


From  the  Drawing  by  P.  Violet 


A  7.  PORTRAIT  OF  PHILIP  JAMES  DE  LOUTHERBOURG,  R.A. 


After  an  Engraving  by  H.  Meyer 


From  the  Drawing  by  J.  Jackson 


A  8.  PORTRAIT  OF  JAMES  NOBTHCOTE,  E.A. 


(Frmt  lent  by  Messrs.  Maggs  Bros.  j 


A  11.  PORTRAIT  OF  JOHN  HOPPNEa,  R./V. 


A  16.  PORTRAIT  OF  J.  M.  W.  TURNER,  R.A. 


After  a  Lithograph  from  the  Drawing  by  George  Dance,  R..A. 


(Drawn  m  Turner's  25th  Year)